The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Written exposure as an intervention for PTSD: A randomized clinical trial with motor vehicle accident survivors
Open accessAbstract
The present study examined the efficacy of a brief, written exposure therapy (WET) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Participants were 46 adults with a current primary diagnosis of motor vehicle accident-related PTSD. Participants were randomly assigned to either WET or a waitlist (WL) condition. Independent assessments took place at baseline and 6-, 18-, and 30-weeks post baseline (WL condition not assessed at 30 weeks). Participants assigned to WET showed significant reductions in PTSD symptom severity at 6- and 18-week post-baseline, relative to WL participants, with large between-group effect sizes. In addition, significantly fewer WET participants met diagnostic criteria for PTSD at both the 6- and 18-week post-baseline assessments, relative to WL participants. Treatment gains were maintained for the WET participants at the 30-week post baseline assessment. Notably, only 9% of participants dropped out of WET and the WET participants reported a high degree of satisfaction with the treatment. These findings suggest that a brief, written exposure treatment may efficaciously treat PTSD. Future research should examine whether WET is efficacious with other PTSD samples, as well as compare the efficacy of WET with that of evidence-based treatments for PTSD.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“WET is an effective treatment for PTSD and is noninferior to other gold standard PTSD treatments (e.g., Cognitive Processing Therapy) and has lower dropout rates [18–21].”
From Written exposure therapy for treatment of perinatal PTSD among women with comorbid PTSD and SUD: A pilot study examining feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness (2023) · cites this paper as [18]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Williams, J. B. W., & First, M. B. (2013) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.104 · Cited by 109,845
Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods.
Longford, N. T., Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1993) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2075823 · Cited by 18,773
Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods
Davidian, M. (2003) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/jasa.2003.s288 · Cited by 13,820
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey
Kessler, R. C. (1995) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1995.03950240066012 · Cited by 10,379
Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential
Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1994) · Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9 · Cited by 9,538
Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P. (1991) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.59.1.12 · Cited by 7,770
Distribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators
Hedges, L. V. (1981) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164588 · Cited by 5,695
Looking at pictures: Affective, facial, visceral, and behavioral reactions
LANG, P. J., GREENWALD, M. K., BRADLEY, M. M., & HAMM, A. O. (1993) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1993.tb03352.x · Cited by 3,190
Assessment of client/patient satisfaction: development of a general scale
Larsen, D. L., Attkisson, C. C., Hargreaves, W. A., & Nguyen, T. D. (1979) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/0149-7189(79)90094-6 · Cited by 2,887
Psychometric properties of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire
Devilly, G. J., & Borkovec, T. D. (2000) · Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0005-7916(00)00012-4 · Cited by 2,295 · cited 1×
“The TEQ has high internal consistency and good testeretest reliability (Devilly & Borkovec, 2000).”
Flagged first, then by citations
2 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lewis, C., Roberts, N. P., Andrew, M., Starling, E., & Bisson, J. I. (2020) · European Journal of Psychotraumatology · doi:10.1080/20008198.2020.1729633 · Cited by 460
Psychological interventions to foster resilience in healthcare professionals
Kunzler, A. M., Helmreich, I., Chmitorz, A., König, J., Binder, H., Wessa, M., & Lieb, K. (2020) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012527.pub2 · Cited by 390
Lewis, C., Roberts, N. P., Gibson, S., & Bisson, J. I. (2020) · European Journal of Psychotraumatology · doi:10.1080/20008198.2019.1709709 · Cited by 382
Feasibility and Acceptability of a Resilience Training Program for Intensive Care Unit Nurses
Mealer, M. L., Conrad, D. L., Evans, J., Jooste, K., Solyntjes, J., ROTHBAUM, B. O., & Moss, M. (2014) · American Journal of Critical Care · doi:10.4037/ajcc2014747 · Cited by 319
Sloan, D. M., Marx, B. P., Lee, D. J., & Resick, P. A. (2018) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.4249 · Cited by 232
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Sloan, D. M., Marx, B. P., Bovin, M. J., Feinstein, B. A., & Gallagher, M. W.
- Affiliations
- Boston University (US)
- Stony Brook University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sloan, Denise M.
- Venue
- Behaviour Research and Therapy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-10
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 627-635
- ISSN
- 0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3433579
- OpenAlex
- W2129792337
- Cited by
- 140
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 5.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (R34MH077658-02)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Keywords
- written exposure therapy, post-traumatic stress disorder, motor vehicle accidents, trauma-focused psychotherapy, PTSD symptom severity, treatment efficacy, treatment retention, treatment satisfaction, brief psychotherapy
- MeSH terms
- Accidents, Traffic, Adult, Female, Humans, Implosive Therapy, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Writing, Treatment Outcome, Survivors
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
