Cited by 68Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchChild Abuse and TraumaChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Meta-Analysis of the Association between Appraisals of Trauma and Posttraumatic Stress in Children and Adolescents

Open access
Mitchell, Ryan, Brennan, Kate, Curran, David, Hanna, Donncha, Dyer, Kevin F. W.·2017·Journal of Traumatic Stress

Abstract

Cognitive models of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) place an emphasis on the role of negative appraisals of traumatic events. It is suggested that the way in which the event is appraised determines the extent to which posttraumatic stress symptoms will be experienced. Therefore, a strong relationship between trauma appraisals and symptoms of PTSD might be expected. However, this relationship is not as firmly established in the child and adolescent literature. A systematic literature review of this relationship returned 467 publications, of which 11 met full eligibility criteria. A random effects meta-analysis revealed a large effect size for the relationship between appraisals and PTSD symptoms in children and adolescents, r = .63, 95% CI [.58, .68], Z = 17.32, p < .001, with significant heterogeneity present. A sensitivity analysis suggested that this relationship was not contingent on 1 specific measure of appraisals. Results were consistent with the cognitive behavioral theory of PTSD, demonstrating that appraisals of trauma are strongly related to posttraumatic stress in children and adolescents. However, this relationship was not observed in a sample of 4- to 6-year-olds, indicating that further research is required to explicate cognitive processing of trauma in very young children.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jts.22157

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. MedCalc, 2016, Statistical software for biomedical research

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Mitchell, R., Brennan, K., Curran, D., Hanna, D., & Dyer, K. F. W.
Affiliations
Queen's University Belfast (GB)
Corresponding author
Mitchell, Ryan
Venue
Journal of Traumatic Stress
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-01-19
Volume
30
Issue
1
Pages
88-93
ISSN
  • 0894-9867 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6598
OpenAlex
W2576045289
Cited by
68
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11
FWCI
10.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Traumatic Stress (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
post-traumatic stress disorder, trauma appraisal, children, adolescents, cognitive-behavioral theory, posttraumatic stress symptoms, young children
MeSH terms
Psychological Trauma, Adolescent, Child, Child, Preschool, Humans, Models, Psychological, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic

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