Cited by 236Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Cognitive change predicts symptom reduction with cognitive therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder

Open access
Kleim, Birgit, Grey, Nick, Wild, Jennifer, Nussbeck, Fridtjof W., Stott, Richard, Hackmann, Ann, Clark, David M., Ehlers, Anke·2013·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: There is a growing body of evidence for the effectiveness of trauma-focused cognitive behavior therapy (TF-CBT) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but few studies to date have investigated the mechanisms by which TF-CBT leads to therapeutic change. Models of PTSD suggest that a core treatment mechanism is the change in dysfunctional appraisals of the trauma and its aftermath. If this is the case, then changes in appraisals should predict a change in symptoms. The present study investigated whether cognitive change precedes symptom change in Cognitive Therapy for PTSD, a version of TF-CBT. METHOD: The study analyzed weekly cognitive and symptom measures from 268 PTSD patients who received a course of Cognitive Therapy for PTSD, using bivariate latent growth modeling. RESULTS: Results showed that (a) dysfunctional trauma-related appraisals and PTSD symptoms both decreased significantly over the course of treatment, (b) changes in appraisals and symptoms were correlated, and (c) weekly change in appraisals significantly predicted subsequent reduction in symptom scores (both corrected for the general decrease over the course of therapy). Changes in PTSD symptom severity did not predict subsequent changes in appraisals. CONCLUSIONS: The study provided preliminary evidence for the temporal precedence of a reduction in negative trauma-related appraisals in symptom reduction during trauma-focused CBT for PTSD. This supports the role of change in appraisals as an active therapeutic mechanism.

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 · 10.1037/a0031290

Cites

70 of 70 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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Foa E. B., & Riggs D. S. (1993). Posttraumatic stress disorder and rape. In Oldham M., Riba M. B., & Tasman A. (Eds.), American Psychiatric Press Review of Psychiatry (pp. 273– 303). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
  2. Muthén L. K., & Muthén B. O. (2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kleim, B., Grey, N., Wild, J., Nussbeck, F. W., Stott, R., Hackmann, A., Clark, D. M., & Ehlers, A.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2013-06
Volume
81
Issue
3
Pages
383-393
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2122872879
Cited by
235
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 5
FWCI
11.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University) (submittedVersion)
  • Publikationen an der Universität Bielefeld (Universität Bielefeld) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (069777)
  • National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health
  • King’s College London
  • National Institute for Health Research Oxford Cognitive Health Clinical Research Facility
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
post-traumatic stress disorder, trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy, therapeutic mechanisms, cognitive change, symptom change, temporal precedence
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Predictive Value of Tests, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome

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