ReviewDer Nervenarzt2024
[Trauma and memory-A contribution to the current debate in law and psychotherapy].
Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recall of memories of past events, experiences and emotions is a complex process. When experiencing traumatic events, as is the case with sexual violence, a host of additional complexities and difficulties arise. This becomes especially important in court cases which rely mostly or exclusively on the testimony of the victim, where the problem of the fallibility of memory takes center stage. Some research studies emphasize the possibility of inducing, altering or suppressing memories, especially in the context of psychotherapy. This has led to the unfortunate reality that the testimony of victims who have undergone psychotherapy is often considered to be unreliable. This in turn can lead to the impression that a decision has to be made between treatment of the adverse effects of traumatic events and maximizing the chances for a conviction of the perpetrator in court. This article introduces some central concepts of our current understanding of memory and gives an overview of the relevant scientific literature and debate. Following this, it examines the dilemma as it pertains to the different groups of all involved parties (i.e., victims, members of the judiciary and psychotherapists). Lastly, it proposes a framework of how to approach a solution to this problem by focusing on research in critical areas, expansion of therapy guidelines and documentation procedures as well as communication of these efforts to all parties involved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.