Cited by 98Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchMigration, Health and TraumaPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

A controlled trial of paroxetine for chronic PTSD, dissociation, and interpersonal problems in mostly minority adults

Open access
Marshall, Randall D., Lewis-Fernandez, Roberto, Blanco, Carlos, Simpson, H. Blair, Lin, Shu-Hsing, Vermes, Donna, Garcia, Wendy, Schneier, Franklin +3 more·2007·Depression and Anxiety

Abstract

This study evaluated the efficacy of paroxetine for symptoms and associated features of chronic posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), interpersonal problems, and dissociative symptoms in an urban population of mostly minority adults. Adult outpatients with a primary DSM-IV diagnosis of chronic PTSD received 1 week of single-blind placebo (N = 70). Those not rated as significantly improved were then randomly assigned to placebo (N = 27) or paroxetine (N = 25) for 10 weeks, with a flexible dosage design (maximum 60 mg by week 7). Significantly more patients treated with paroxetine were rated as responders (14/21, 66.7%) on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scale (CGI-I) compared to patients treated with placebo (6/22, 27.3%). Mixed effects models showed greater reductions on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) total score (primary plus associated features of PTSD) in the paroxetine versus placebo groups. Paroxetine was also superior to placebo on reduction of dissociative symptoms [Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) score] and reduction in self-reported interpersonal problems [Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP) score]. In a 12-week maintenance phase, paroxetine response continued to improve, but placebo response did not. Paroxetine was well tolerated and superior to placebo in ameliorating the symptoms of chronic PTSD, associated features of PTSD, dissociative symptoms, and interpersonal problems in the first trial conducted primarily in minority adults.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/da.20176

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Only two medications have performed better than placebo for treatment of dissociative symptoms in randomized controlled trials: naloxone and paroxetine.

    “Only two medications have performed better than placebo for treatment of dissociative symptoms in RCTs: the opioid antagonist naloxone and the SSRI paroxetine.”

    From Treatment of dissociative identity disorder: leveraging neurobiology to optimize success (2024) · cites this paper as [127]

    The Abstract and Dissociative Experiences Scale results (page not available) report that paroxetine outperformed placebo on dissociative symptoms in a randomized trial of adults with chronic PTSD. The paper does not establish that naloxone did so, or that these were the only two medications with such results; searches for naloxone and the two-medication claim found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Paroxetine effectively reduced dissociative symptoms in PTSD in a randomized controlled trial.

    “One RCT demonstrated effective reduction of dissociative symptoms in PTSD using a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), paroxetine [127].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 50 · Cited by 98

Authors
Marshall, R. D., Lewis-Fernandez, R., Blanco, C., Simpson, H. B., Lin, S.-H., Vermes, D., Garcia, W., Schneier, F., Neria, Y., Sanchez-Lacay, A., & Liebowitz, M. R.
Affiliations
New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Marshall, Randall D.
Venue
Depression and Anxiety
Published
2007
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
77-84
ISSN
  • 1091-4269 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6394
OpenAlex
W2029676726
Cited by
98
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Depression and Anxiety (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k08mh001412-05)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH01412)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Migration, Health and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
paroxetine, chronic posttraumatic stress disorder, dissociative symptoms, interpersonal problems, antidepressant efficacy, maintenance therapy, treatment response
MeSH terms
Adult, Chronic Disease, Dissociative Disorders, Double-Blind Method, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Assessment, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Urban Population, Paroxetine, Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation, Black People, White People

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review