Reports an error in "High sensitivity and specificity screening for clinically significant intimate partner violence" by Richard E. Heyman, Katherine J. W. Baucom, Shu Xu, Amy M. Smith Slep, Jeffery D. Snarr, Heather M. Foran, Michael F. Lorber, Alexandra K. Wojda and David J. Linkh (Journal of Family Psychology, 2021[Feb], Vol 35[1], 80-91). In the article, the affiliation of Heather M. Foran was incorrectly listed as "Family Translational Research Group, New York University." Her correct affiliation is "Institute for Psychology, University of Klagenfurt, and Institute for Psychology, University of Braunschweig." In addition, there were two errors in Table 3 whereby the last row of column 1 should have been labeled "Any of the two items" rather than "Both items," and the final subheading should have read "Female → Male psychological CS-IPV (Male report)a " rather than "Male → Female psychological CS-IPV (Male report)a." Finally, in the Supplemental Material, the second item of the "Screener for Clinically Significant IPV-Psychological" questionnaire should have been deleted. The online version of this article has been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2020-51524-001). The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has recommended that clinicians screen patients for intimate partner violence (IPV). This article aims to develop and test the first screeners for clinically significant physical and psychological IPV (i.e., acts meeting criteria in the International Classification of Diseases (11th ed.; ICD-11; World Health Organization, 2019) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). The goal was to derive screeners that (1) are maximally brief, while still achieving high sensitivity and specificity; (2) assess perpetration and victimization when either men or women are reporting; and (3) use ICD-11/DSM-5 criteria as the reference standard. Random samples of active duty service members at 82 installations worldwide were obtained via e-mail invitation (2006: N = 54,543; 2008: N = 48,909); their response rates were excellent for long general population surveys with no payment (2006: 44.7%, 2008: 49.0%). The population of spouses at the participating installation was invited by mailed postcard (2006: N = 19,722; 2008: N = 12,127; response rates-2006: 12.3%, 2008: 10.8%). Clinically significant physical intimate partner violence can be effectively screened with as few as four items, with sensitivities > 90% and specificities > 95%; clinically significant psychological intimate partner violence can be screened with two items. Men and women can be screened with equivalent accuracy, as can those committing the violence and those victimized by it. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

“临床上显着的亲密伴侣暴力的高敏感性和特异性筛查”：更正。

报告 Richard E. Heyman、Katherine JW Baucom、Shu Xu、Amy M. Smith Slep、Jeffery D. Snarr、Heather M. Foran、Michael F. Lorber 在“临床上显着的亲密伴侣暴力的高敏感性和特异性筛查”中的错误, Alexandra K. Wojda 和 David J. Linkh（家庭心理学杂志，2021[Feb]，Vol 35[1]，80-91）。在文章中，Heather M. Foran 的隶属关系被错误地列为“纽约大学家庭转化研究小组”。她的正确隶属关系是“克拉根福大学心理学研究所和布伦瑞克大学心理学研究所”。此外，表 3 中有两个错误，第 1 列的最后一行应该被标记为“两个项目中的任何一个”而不是“两个项目”。最后的副标题应该是“女性→男性心理 CS-IPV（男性报告）a”而不是“男性→女性心理 CS-IPV（男性报告）a”。最后，在补充材料中，“临床显着 IPV 心理筛查”问卷的第二项应已删除。本文的在线版本已更正。（以下原始文章摘要出现在记录 2020-51524-001 中）。美国预防服务工作组建议临床医生对患者进行亲密伴侣暴力 (IPV) 筛查。本文旨在开发和测试第一批具有临床意义的生理和心理 IPV 筛查仪（即符合国际疾病分类标准的行为（第 11 版；ICD-11；世界卫生组织，2019）和精神疾病诊断和统计手册（第 5 版；DSM-5；美国精神病学协会，2013）。目标是获得以下筛选器： (1) 尽可能简短，同时仍能实现高灵敏度和特异性；(2) 在男性或女性举报时评估犯罪和受害情况；(3) 使用 ICD-11/DSM-5 标准作为参考标准。通过电子邮件邀请获得全球 82 个装置的现役军人的随机样本（2006 年：N = 54,543；2008 年：N = 48,909）；他们的答复率在长期的无偿普通人口调查中表现出色（2006 年：44.7%，2008 年：49.0%）。通过邮寄明信片邀请参与装置的配偶人数（2006 年：N = 19,722；2008 年：N = 12,127；回复率 - 2006 年：12.3%，2008 年：10.8%）。临床上显着的身体亲密伴侣暴力只需四个项目即可有效筛查，敏感性> 90%，特异性> 95%；临床上显着的心理亲密伴侣暴力行为可以通过两个项目进行筛查。可以对男性和女性进行同等准确度的筛查，施暴者和受害者也可以。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA，保留所有权利）。