An exploratory configural caseness rule formalizes when a veteran warrants treatment for moral injury¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The CIMI-M manual includes an exploratory four-part decision rule for probable clinical caseness, explicitly not a formal diagnosis. → de Goede 2026

Evidence¶

de Goede 2026¶

de Goede, M. L., Boelen, P. A., Litz, B. T., & ter Heide, F. J. J. (2026). Mapping moral injury: Development and feasibility of the Clinical Interview for Moral Injury—military version (CIMI-M). PLOS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0359553

q2 · i? · design · r3

Definitional statement from the instrument-aim section describing the configural decision rule included in the interview manual. The article presents it as a formalization of treatment-warrant judgment, not a diagnosis, and reports no validity or reliability data for the rule.

"We experimentally defined clinical caseness as: (1) endorsement of at least one high-stakes and currently distressing PMIE; (2) reports of functionally interfering problems in at least two domains of moral injury; (3) that are new onset; and (4) for which recovery has been impeded or is unlikely without clinical intervention."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Qualitative analysis finds the CIMI-M helped veterans share experiences and helped clinicians build trust and plan treatment — related
• Veterans and clinicians rate the CIMI-M as feasible, acceptable, and clinically useful in a preliminary evaluation — related