The independent predictive value of peritraumatic dissociation for PTSD symptomatology after type I trauma: A systematic review of prospective studies
Open accessAbstract
We conducted a systematic review of prospective studies examining the independent predictive value of peritraumatic dissociation (PD) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptomatology following single traumatic events. Insight into the independent predictive value may help to identify victims at risk for PTSD symptomatology. For this purpose a literature search was carried out using the online databases PsycINFO, Medline/Pubmed, and PILOTS. Studies were included if they were published in peer-reviewed journals (before 2007), focused on more or less single traumatic events (Type I trauma), assessed PD within 1 month, had follow-ups 3 months or later, and which controlled for mental health problems at the time PD was assessed. The majority of the 17 identified studies showed no or only weak indications of an independent predictive value of PD for PTSD symptomatology following type I traumas. Only 3 of the 6 studies with positive results reported a strong independent predictive value of PD. Although bivariately associated with PTSD symptomatology, there is no general consensus across prospective Type I trauma studies that PD qualifies as an important independent predictor of PTSD symptomatology. Results indicate that initial mental health problems, among other factors, are better predictors of PTSD symptomatology than PD.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Peritraumatic dissociation increases the risk of subsequent PTSD.
“There is evidence that peritraumatic dissociation increases the risk of subsequent PTSD [18, 25–30].”
From Dissociation and Alterations in Brain Function and Structure: Implications for Borderline Personality Disorder (2017) · cites this paper as [30]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 52 · Cited by 123
- Authors
- van der Velden, P. G., & Wittmann, L.
- Affiliations
- University Hospital Zurich (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Wittmann, Lutz
- ORCID
- Wittmann, Lutz
- Venue
- Clinical Psychology Review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-07
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1009-1020
- ISSN
- 0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2091752452
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 52
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 1.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.zora.uzh.ch
- Licence
- Locations
- Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
- Keywords
- peritraumatic dissociation, post-traumatic stress disorder, posttraumatic stress symptoms, risk prediction, prospective study
- MeSH terms
- Dissociative Disorders, Humans, Predictive Value of Tests, Prospective Studies, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Stress, Psychological
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