Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32847509›Full record

SynthesisBMC family practice2020

Psychological interventions for posttraumatic stress disorder involving primary care physicians: systematic review and Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Rebekka Gehringer, Antje Freytag, Markus Krause, Peter Schlattmann, Konrad Schmidt, Sven Schulz, Sophie Jana Zezulka, Florian Wolf, Jonas Grininger, Mathias Berger and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 82% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rebekka GehringerInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Germany. rebekka.gehringer@med.uni-jena.de.ORCID 0000-0002-6634-0716
Antje FreytagInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Germany.
Markus KrauseInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Germany.
Peter SchlattmannInstitute of Medical Statistics, Computer Sciences and Documentation, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Jena, Germany.
Konrad SchmidtInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Germany.
Sven SchulzInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Germany.
Sophie Jana ZezulkaInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Germany.
Florian WolfInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Germany.
Jonas GriningerInstitute of General Practice/Family Medicine, University Hospital of LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Mathias BergerDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Horst Christian VollmarInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Bachstr. 18, 07743, Jena, Germany.
Jochen GensichenInstitute of General Practice/Family Medicine, University Hospital of LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Jena University Hospital · DELMU Klinikum · DEUniversity of Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-based psychological interventions for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are available in specialized settings, but adequate care in primary care is often lacking. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of psychological interventions for PTSD involving primary care physicians (PCPs) and to characterize these interventions as well as their providers.

methodA systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Primary outcome were symptoms of PTSD.

resultsFour RCTs with a total of 774 patients suffering from PTSD symptoms were included, all applying cognitive behavioural based interventions. Three studies with psychological interventions being conducted by case managers were pooled in a meta-analysis. Interventions were not effective in the short term (0-6 months; SMD, - 0.1; 95% CI, - 0.24-0.04; I

conclusionsPsychological interventions for PTSD in primary care settings may be effective in the long term but number and quality of included studies was limited so the results should be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

Physicians, Primary CareStress Disorders, Post-TraumaticHumansPsychosocial InterventionPsychotherapyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicPrimary carePTSDSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32847509
PMCPMC7450546
OpenAlexW3080321414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.