Cited by 504Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchCancer survivorship and careResilience and Mental Health

A meta-analytic clarification of the relationship between posttraumatic growth and symptoms of posttraumatic distress disorder

Open access
Shakespeare-Finch, Jane, Lurie-Beck, Janine·2014·Journal of Anxiety Disorders

Abstract

Traumatic experiences can have a powerful impact on individuals and communities but the relationship between perceptions of beneficial and pathological outcomes are not known. Therefore, this meta-analysis examined both the strength and the linearity of the relationship between symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and perceptions of posttraumatic growth (PTG) as well as identifying the potential moderating roles of trauma type and age. Literature searches of all languages were conducted using the ProQuest, Wiley Interscience, ScienceDirect, Informaworld and Web of Science databases. Linear and quadratic (curvilinear) rs as well as βs were analysed. Forty-two studies (N = 11,469) that examined both PTG and symptoms of PTSD were included in meta-analytic calculations. The combined studies yielded a significant linear relationship between PTG and PTSD symptoms (r = 0.315, CI = 0.299, 0.331), but also a significantly stronger (as tested by Fisher's transformation) curvilinear relationship (r =0.372, CI = 0.353, 0.391). The strength and linearity of these relationships differed according to trauma type and age. The results remind those working with traumatised people that positive and negative post-trauma outcomes can co-occur. A focus only on PTSD symptoms may limit or slow recovery and mask the potential for growth.

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 · 10.1016/j.janxdis.2013.10.005

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shakespeare-Finch, J., & Lurie-Beck, J.
Venue
Journal of Anxiety Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-03
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
223-229
ISSN
0887-6185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1763254284
Cited by
504
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 7
FWCI
3.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Anxiety Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • ResearchOnline - JCU (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
  • Faculty of Health; Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
Keywords
posttraumatic growth, post-traumatic stress disorder, posttraumatic stress symptoms, trauma type, age differences, curvilinear relationship, trauma recovery
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Humans, 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