The typical reliance on self-report questionnaires in retrospective case-control studies of childhood abuse and psychotic disorders has been criticised, due to the potential for recall bias associated with, amongst other factors, cognitive impairments and detachment from reality, among individuals with psychosis. One way to establish if any substantial bias may exist is to examine whether the concordance of reports of childhood abuse established from retrospective self-report methods versus more comprehensive interviewer-rated assessments differ between individuals with psychosis and controls. Data from the Childhood Adversity and Psychosis (CAPsy) study were used to examine the accuracy, strength of agreement, and convergent validity of two distinct retrospective measures of childhood abuse: a self-report questionnaire (the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire; CTQ) and a comprehensive interview (the Childhood Experiences of Care and Abuse schedule; CECA). In a sample of 234 cases with first-episode psychosis and 293 controls, we found no strong evidence that the validity of the two measures differed between cases and controls. For reports of sexual and emotional abuse, we found fair levels of agreement between CECA and CTQ ratings in both groups (kappa coefficients 0.43-0.53), moderate to high sensitivity and specificity, and reasonably high convergent validity (tetrachoric correlations of 0.78-0.80). For physical abuse, convergent validity was slightly lower in cases compared with controls. Both measures can be used in future studies to retrospectively assess associations between childhood abuse and psychotic phenomena, but time-permitting, the CECA is preferable as it provides additional important contextual details of abuse exposure.

中文翻译：

---

首发精神病患者和以人群为基础的对照组儿童虐待的自我报告和采访者评价的回顾性报告之间的比较。

在儿童虐待和精神病性障碍的回顾性病例对照研究中，对自我报告问卷的典型依赖受到了批评，因为在精神病患者中可能存在与认知障碍和脱离现实等因素相关的回忆偏见。确定是否存在任何实质性偏见的一种方法是检查通过回顾性自我报告方法建立的儿童虐待报告与更全面的采访者评级评估的一致性是否在精神病患者和对照组之间存在差异。来自儿童逆境和精神病 (CAPsy) 研究的数据被用来检查儿童虐待的两种不同回顾性测量的准确性、一致性强度和收敛效度：自我报告问卷（儿童创伤问卷；CTQ）和综合访谈（儿童护理和虐待经历；CECA）。在 234 例首发精神病病例和 293 例对照样本中，我们没有发现强有力的证据表明这两种测量方法的有效性在病例和对照之间存在差异。对于性虐待和情感虐待的报告，我们发现两组的 CECA 和 CTQ 评分之间的一致性水平相当（kappa 系数 0.43-0.53），中等到高的敏感性和特异性，以及相当高的收敛效度（四环相关性为 0.78-0.80） . 对于身体虐待，与对照组相比，病例的收敛效度略低。这两种措施都可以在未来的研究中用于回顾性评估儿童虐待与精神病现象之间的关联，