CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 114Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthChild Therapy and Development

Grief and trauma intervention for children after disaster: Exploring coping skills versus trauma narration

Salloum, Alison, Overstreet, Stacy·2012·Behaviour Research and Therapy
DOI 10.1016/j.brat.2012.01.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study evaluated the differential effects of the Grief and Trauma Intervention (GTI) with coping skills and trauma narrative processing (CN) and coping skills only (C). Seventy African American children (6-12 years old) were randomly assigned to GTI-CN or GTI-C. Both treatments consisted of a manualized 11-session intervention and a parent meeting. Measures of trauma exposure, posttraumatic stress symptoms, depression, traumatic grief, global distress, social support, and parent reported behavioral problems were administered at pre, post, 3 and 12 months post intervention. In general, children in both treatment groups demonstrated significant improvements in distress related symptoms and social support, which, with the exception of externalizing symptoms for GTI-C, were maintained up to 12 months post intervention. Results suggest that building coping skills without the structured trauma narrative may be a viable intervention to achieve symptom relief in children experiencing trauma-related distress. However, it may be that highly distressed children experience more symptom relief with coping skills plus narrative processing than with coping skills alone. More research on the differential effects of coping skills and trauma narration on child distress and adaptive functioning outcomes is needed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2012.01.001

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 54 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Salloum, A., & Overstreet, S.
Affiliations
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • Tulane University (US)
Corresponding author
Salloum, Alison
ORCID
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-03
Volume
50
Issue
3
Pages
169-179
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.brat.2012.01.001
OpenAlex
W2048135403
Cited by
114
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
10.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of South Florida (R061796)
  • Institute of Mental Hygiene
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Therapy and Development
Keywords
grief in children, traumatic grief, posttraumatic stress symptoms, coping strategies, disaster exposure, African American children, parental involvement, social support, externalizing problems, child distress
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Analysis of Variance, Bereavement, Child, Depression, Disasters, Female, Grief, Humans, Male, Patient Compliance, Perception, Surveys and Questionnaires, School Health Services, Social Support, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Patient Satisfaction, Narration, New Orleans, Cyclonic Storms

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