ReviewBritish medical bulletin2025
PTSD and complex PTSD, current treatments and debates: a review of reviews.
Review in British medical bulletin, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Childhood emotional maltreatment and trauma-related outcomes: a systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2026Pooled it
- ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD in Serbia: clinical validation of the International Trauma Questionnaire.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2026Article
- The Richards Trauma Process: a before-after single-arm feasibility trial of a novel psychotherapy.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- Choreographing time: toward therapy-aligned entactogens for complex PTSD.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Critical Evaluation of the Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Child Health and Wellbeing and Suggested Preparedness for Future Pandemics-A Narrative Review.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Psychotherapy for complex post-traumatic stress disorder: efficacy and therapeutic factors.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Trauma, Power, and Psychological Safety: Understanding the Mental Health Impact of Workplace Bullying.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) were published in 2018, based on research up until that point. In this review, we summarize the current state of the evidence and discuss the findings of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between 2019 and 2024. SOURCES OF DATA: We include peer-reviewed systematic reviews and meta-analyses published within the last 5 years. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Reviews and meta-analyses continue to support the efficacy, and cost-effectiveness, of trauma-focused psychological interventions, particularly Trauma-Focused Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy and Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: Despite their demonstrated efficacy, dropout rates from psychological interventions for PTSD remain high. There has also been a rapid proliferation of research into novel interventions for treating PTSD. However, much of this research is of low quality and lacks head-to-head comparisons with established interventions. GROWING POINTS: Novel methods of delivery of established treatments are being developed, including using virtual reality, intensive forms of treatment, and digital and remote methods of delivery. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: More qualitative research to explore recipients' experiences of interventions. More good-quality research and head-to-head comparisons of treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.