Universal Informatics · Research reading room

Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing in Child Victims of Domestic Violence.

Jaberghaderi N; Rezaei M; Kolivand M; Shokoohi A · Iranian journal of psychiatry · 2019 · Randomized comparative trial with blinded assessment

Original publication · Original publication · Original publication · Original publication

Recorded summary

CBT and EMDR improved posttraumatic symptom scores relative to controls; classroom behavior and academic performance did not show clear benefit.

Recorded limitations

37/139 dropped out, with higher attrition in active arms. Analysis involved completers; alternating allocation details and baseline imbalance raise bias concerns. Follow-up was only two weeks.

Evidence and provenance

Chapter Trust Factor uses a minimum of three distinct qualifying studies. Publication records retain their own evidence and assessment.

Study design and assessment
design
Randomized comparative trial with blinded assessment
assessment
category
rct
is Randomized Controlled Trial
true
basis
Methods describe age/sex matching and drawing names from a hat while alternating assignments; concealment is uncertain.
sources

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

review Scope
selected-methods
trust Factor
scope
Paper
status
assessed
score
2
randomized Controlled Trial
true
peer Reviewed
true
blinding
not-confirmed
basis
Methods describe age/sex matching and drawing names from a hat while alternating assignments; concealment is uncertain.
sources

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

review Scope
selected-methods
human Approval
false
display Crosses
2
masking Roles
participants
Not established from accessed source.
providers
Different therapy protocols were delivered; provider blinding not established.
assessors
Trained pre/post psychologists blinded to assignment.
analysts
Not established from accessed source.
rating Scale
library-trust-factor/1-3
jadad
status
unassessed
score
Not recorded
evidence
evidence Type
Randomized comparative trial with blinded assessment
intervention
Abuse-focused CBT versus EMDR Up to 12 individual 45–60-minute sessions over 4–12 weeks; treatment-specific stopping rules.
comparator
CBT, EMDR and no-treatment control; all parents received psychoeducation.
sample
Reported cohort/enrollment: 139. Analyzed/interviewed: 102.
measurement
Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms; Classroom behavior and school performance
timing
Two weeks after treatment
trial Id
relationship Note
Direct study of a therapeutic intervention, its follow-up, or service engagement in children/families affected by domestic or interparental violence. Population and setting are specific; no inference of effectiveness for all survivors, ages or violence contexts.
measured Genes
None recorded
pathways
None recorded
source Access
level
selected-methods
source URLs

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
outcomes
  1. name
    Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms
    follow Up
    Two weeks after treatment
    result
    Active groups improved relative to control.
    effect Estimate
    Not recorded
    uncertainty
    Not established from accessed source.
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed source.
  2. name
    Classroom behavior and school performance
    follow Up
    Two weeks after treatment
    result
    No significant improvement reported.
    effect Estimate
    Not recorded
    uncertainty
    Not established from accessed source.
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed source.
quality
risk Of Bias
Important concerns: 37/139 dropped out, with higher attrition in active arms. Analysis involved completers; alternating allocation details and baseline imbalance raise bias concerns. Follow-up was only two weeks.
attrition
CBT15/40 dropped out; EMDR16/40; control 6/59. Total 102 analyzed.
confounding
Allocation, adherence, co-interventions and reporting limitations require consideration; see design and limitations.
adverse Findings
Ongoing violence contributed to dropout; formal adverse-event ascertainment not established.
transfer Limits
Do not extrapolate beyond the described population and intervention.
jadad
not established
masking Roles
participants
Not established from accessed source.
providers
Different therapy protocols were delivered; provider blinding not established.
assessors
Trained pre/post psychologists blinded to assignment.
analysts
Not established from accessed source.
population
relation
direct
population
Schoolchildren physically abused in the family and/or witnessing parental/family violence.
exposure Evidence
Eligibility and interviews verified child physical abuse and/or family violence.
rationale
Direct study of a therapeutic intervention, its follow-up, or service engagement in children/families affected by domestic or interparental violence.
transfer Limit
Population and setting are specific; no inference of effectiveness for all survivors, ages or violence contexts.
Topics and recorded topic scores
  1. key
    vision:domestic-family-violence
    title
    Domestic & Family Violence
    collection
    vision
    trust Score
    2
Citation snapshot and identifiers
id
dv-children-31114620
doi
10.18502/ijps.v14i1.425
pmid
31114620
citation Snapshot
count
Not recorded
source
Not recorded
retrieved At
Not recorded
status
not-assessed
citations By Collection
vision
Not recorded
Complete approved library record
publication Approval
status
approved-for-publication
approved By
Ben Korbel
approved At
2026-11-01
assessment
AI assessed; human approved for publication
scope
Qualified research-library summaries. No professional clinical peer review or treatment recommendation is claimed.
source Revision
audit-r2-b2ab0c4d2905
source Content Hash
b2ab0c4d2905ff690cc7aad8709e4e42b33fd88023cd942685a7363050276346
source Access
level
selected-methods
source URLs

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
editorial Audit
auditor
Codex (AI)
completed At
2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00
prior Content Hash
60087713d51fbeaeb94741faf5b67df1c96575a6871111480fa510e4f2514916
prior Revision
r1-60087713d51f
prior Source
frozen-120
source Verification
id
dv-children-31114620
doi
10.18502/ijps.v14i1.425
pmid
31114620
fresh Metadata
Europe PMC core
metadata Retrieved
true
metadata SHA256
68d32f4a32e25b1ddaec9a6a6dc88e7187a6cc9834e133fd46dea9a2b804a953
claim Check
Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.
sources

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

applied Proposals
None recorded
method
AI editorial assessment of all 130 publication records: compare identity, headline finding, design, relevance and limitations with indexed abstracts or available primary material; adjudicate retained source-supported methods amendments. This is a source-limited publication audit, not an independent full-text systematic review or a clinical guideline.
limitations

Abstract-only records do not establish allocation concealment, complete harms reporting or full risk of bias. · No formal independent RoB 2, GRADE appraisal or numerical reconstruction of every effect was performed. · Source-access labels describe retained appraisal evidence; fuller prior appraisals were checked through their source ledgers and selected material, not independently repeated in full. · Publication counts are not independent trial or participant counts; cohort links and overlapping review evidence remain provisional. · A randomized design cross does not indicate benefit, low risk of bias or human approval. No double-blind trial is verified in this release. · No professional clinical peer review is claimed. Recommended content is limited to accurately qualified research summaries.

study Family Id
cbt-emdr-jaberghaderi-2019-n139
family Linkage Uncertain
false
approaches

emdr

id
dv-children-31114620
aliases
None recorded
title
Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing in Child Victims of Domestic Violence.
journal
Iranian journal of psychiatry
neurotransmitters
None recorded
year
2019
authors
Jaberghaderi N; Rezaei M; Kolivand M; Shokoohi A
design
Randomized comparative trial with blinded assessment
kind
Journal article
identity Conflict
Not recorded
doi
10.18502/ijps.v14i1.425
pmid
31114620
urls

https://doi.org/10.18502/ijps.v14i1.425 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

collections

vision

categories

Clinical & self-report

targets
None recorded
priority
1
quotes
None recorded
summary
CBT and EMDR improved posttraumatic symptom scores relative to controls; classroom behavior and academic performance did not show clear benefit.
limitation
37/139 dropped out, with higher attrition in active arms. Analysis involved completers; alternating allocation details and baseline imbalance raise bias concerns. Follow-up was only two weeks.
citation Count
Not recorded
citation Snapshot
count
Not recorded
source
Not recorded
retrieved At
Not recorded
status
not-assessed
study Design Assessment
category
rct
is Randomized Controlled Trial
true
basis
Methods describe age/sex matching and drawing names from a hat while alternating assignments; concealment is uncertain.
sources

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

review Scope
selected-methods
paper Trust Assessment
scope
Paper
status
assessed
score
2
randomized Controlled Trial
true
peer Reviewed
true
blinding
not-confirmed
basis
Methods describe age/sex matching and drawing names from a hat while alternating assignments; concealment is uncertain.
sources

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

review Scope
selected-methods
human Approval
false
display Crosses
2
masking Roles
participants
Not established from accessed source.
providers
Different therapy protocols were delivered; provider blinding not established.
assessors
Trained pre/post psychologists blinded to assignment.
analysts
Not established from accessed source.
rating Scale
library-trust-factor/1-3
citations By Collection
vision
Not recorded
topics
  1. key
    vision:domestic-family-violence
    title
    Domestic & Family Violence
    collection
    vision
    trust Score
    2
journal Key
iranianjournalofpsychiatry
journal Label
Iranian journal of psychiatry
chapter Entries
  1. id
    vision-dv-dv-children-31114620
    aliases
    None recorded
    title
    Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing in Child Victims of Domestic Violence.
    authors
    Jaberghaderi N; Rezaei M; Kolivand M; Shokoohi A
    year
    2019
    journal
    Iranian journal of psychiatry
    doi
    10.18502/ijps.v14i1.425
    pmid
    31114620
    urls

    https://doi.org/10.18502/ijps.v14i1.425 · https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    collections

    vision

    categories

    Clinical & self-report

    targets
    None recorded
    neurotransmitters
    None recorded
    conditions

    trauma

    condition Evidence
    1. id
      trauma
      evidence
      1. field
        outcomes
        text
        Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms | Classroom behavior and school performance
        matched Text
        posttraumatic
      scope
      Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
    age Groups

    children

    age Population
    record Id
    dv-children-31114620
    collections

    vision

    groups

    children

    reported Ages
    8–12 years
    youth Scope
    Not recorded
    youth Source Note
    focus
    source URL
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/
    basis Type
    source-limited-ai-editorial-assessment
    classification Note
    Original age terms: children. Programme targets or possible eligibility are not counted as observed ages.
    community Matches
    1. category Id
      domestic-violence
      relation
      direct
    kind
    Journal article
    design
    Randomized comparative trial with blinded assessment
    origin
    approved-dv-20261101
    priority
    1
    quotes
    None recorded
    finding
    CBT and EMDR improved posttraumatic symptom scores relative to controls; classroom behavior and academic performance did not show clear benefit.
    summary
    CBT and EMDR improved posttraumatic symptom scores relative to controls; classroom behavior and academic performance did not show clear benefit.
    limitation
    37/139 dropped out, with higher attrition in active arms. Analysis involved completers; alternating allocation details and baseline imbalance raise bias concerns. Follow-up was only two weeks.
    evidence
    evidence Type
    Randomized comparative trial with blinded assessment
    intervention
    Abuse-focused CBT versus EMDR Up to 12 individual 45–60-minute sessions over 4–12 weeks; treatment-specific stopping rules.
    comparator
    CBT, EMDR and no-treatment control; all parents received psychoeducation.
    sample
    Reported cohort/enrollment: 139. Analyzed/interviewed: 102.
    measurement
    Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms; Classroom behavior and school performance
    timing
    Two weeks after treatment
    trial Id
    relationship Note
    Direct study of a therapeutic intervention, its follow-up, or service engagement in children/families affected by domestic or interparental violence. Population and setting are specific; no inference of effectiveness for all survivors, ages or violence contexts.
    measured Genes
    None recorded
    pathways
    None recorded
    source Access
    level
    selected-methods
    source URLs

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
    outcomes
    1. name
      Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms
      follow Up
      Two weeks after treatment
      result
      Active groups improved relative to control.
      effect Estimate
      Not recorded
      uncertainty
      Not established from accessed source.
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed source.
    2. name
      Classroom behavior and school performance
      follow Up
      Two weeks after treatment
      result
      No significant improvement reported.
      effect Estimate
      Not recorded
      uncertainty
      Not established from accessed source.
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed source.
    quality
    risk Of Bias
    Important concerns: 37/139 dropped out, with higher attrition in active arms. Analysis involved completers; alternating allocation details and baseline imbalance raise bias concerns. Follow-up was only two weeks.
    attrition
    CBT15/40 dropped out; EMDR16/40; control 6/59. Total 102 analyzed.
    confounding
    Allocation, adherence, co-interventions and reporting limitations require consideration; see design and limitations.
    adverse Findings
    Ongoing violence contributed to dropout; formal adverse-event ascertainment not established.
    transfer Limits
    Do not extrapolate beyond the described population and intervention.
    jadad
    not established
    masking Roles
    participants
    Not established from accessed source.
    providers
    Different therapy protocols were delivered; provider blinding not established.
    assessors
    Trained pre/post psychologists blinded to assignment.
    analysts
    Not established from accessed source.
    population
    relation
    direct
    population
    Schoolchildren physically abused in the family and/or witnessing parental/family violence.
    exposure Evidence
    Eligibility and interviews verified child physical abuse and/or family violence.
    rationale
    Direct study of a therapeutic intervention, its follow-up, or service engagement in children/families affected by domestic or interparental violence.
    transfer Limit
    Population and setting are specific; no inference of effectiveness for all survivors, ages or violence contexts.
    study Design Assessment
    category
    rct
    is Randomized Controlled Trial
    true
    basis
    Methods describe age/sex matching and drawing names from a hat while alternating assignments; concealment is uncertain.
    sources

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    review Scope
    selected-methods
    paper Trust Assessment
    scope
    Paper
    status
    assessed
    score
    2
    randomized Controlled Trial
    true
    peer Reviewed
    true
    blinding
    not-confirmed
    basis
    Methods describe age/sex matching and drawing names from a hat while alternating assignments; concealment is uncertain.
    sources

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    review Scope
    selected-methods
    human Approval
    false
    display Crosses
    2
    masking Roles
    participants
    Not established from accessed source.
    providers
    Different therapy protocols were delivered; provider blinding not established.
    assessors
    Trained pre/post psychologists blinded to assignment.
    analysts
    Not established from accessed source.
    rating Scale
    library-trust-factor/1-3
    jadad
    status
    unassessed
    score
    Not recorded
    citation Snapshot
    count
    Not recorded
    source
    Not recorded
    retrieved At
    Not recorded
    status
    not-assessed
    citation Count
    Not recorded
    publication Approval
    status
    approved-for-publication
    approved By
    Ben Korbel
    approved At
    2026-11-01
    assessment
    AI assessed; human approved for publication
    scope
    Qualified research-library summaries. No professional clinical peer review or treatment recommendation is claimed.
    source Revision
    audit-r2-b2ab0c4d2905
    source Content Hash
    b2ab0c4d2905ff690cc7aad8709e4e42b33fd88023cd942685a7363050276346
    source Access
    level
    selected-methods
    source URLs

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
    study Family Id
    cbt-emdr-jaberghaderi-2019-n139
    family Linkage Uncertain
    false
    approaches

    emdr

    record Id
    dv-children-31114620
    source Pages
    None recorded
    editorial Audit
    auditor
    Codex (AI)
    completed At
    2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00
    prior Content Hash
    60087713d51fbeaeb94741faf5b67df1c96575a6871111480fa510e4f2514916
    prior Revision
    r1-60087713d51f
    prior Source
    frozen-120
    source Verification
    id
    dv-children-31114620
    doi
    10.18502/ijps.v14i1.425
    pmid
    31114620
    fresh Metadata
    Europe PMC core
    metadata Retrieved
    true
    metadata SHA256
    68d32f4a32e25b1ddaec9a6a6dc88e7187a6cc9834e133fd46dea9a2b804a953
    claim Check
    Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.
    sources

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    applied Proposals
    None recorded
    method
    AI editorial assessment of all 130 publication records: compare identity, headline finding, design, relevance and limitations with indexed abstracts or available primary material; adjudicate retained source-supported methods amendments. This is a source-limited publication audit, not an independent full-text systematic review or a clinical guideline.
    limitations

    Abstract-only records do not establish allocation concealment, complete harms reporting or full risk of bias. · No formal independent RoB 2, GRADE appraisal or numerical reconstruction of every effect was performed. · Source-access labels describe retained appraisal evidence; fuller prior appraisals were checked through their source ledgers and selected material, not independently repeated in full. · Publication counts are not independent trial or participant counts; cohort links and overlapping review evidence remain provisional. · A randomized design cross does not indicate benefit, low risk of bias or human approval. No double-blind trial is verified in this release. · No professional clinical peer review is claimed. Recommended content is limited to accurately qualified research summaries.

    assessment Record
    id
    dv-children-31114620
    title
    Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing in Child Victims of Domestic Violence.
    authors

    Jaberghaderi N · Rezaei M · Kolivand M · Shokoohi A

    year
    2019
    journal
    Iranian journal of psychiatry
    doi
    10.18502/ijps.v14i1.425
    pmid
    31114620
    trial Registration
    None recorded
    collection
    vision
    intervention Family
    Abuse-focused CBT versus EMDR
    publication Type
    Randomized comparative trial with blinded assessment
    study Family Id
    cbt-emdr-jaberghaderi-2019-n139
    family Linkage Uncertain
    false
    linked Publication PMIDs
    None recorded
    existing Repository Matches
    None recorded
    relevance
    relation
    direct
    population
    Schoolchildren physically abused in the family and/or witnessing parental/family violence.
    exposure Evidence
    Eligibility and interviews verified child physical abuse and/or family violence.
    rationale
    Direct study of a therapeutic intervention, its follow-up, or service engagement in children/families affected by domestic or interparental violence.
    transfer Limit
    Population and setting are specific; no inference of effectiveness for all survivors, ages or violence contexts.
    age
    groups

    children

    reported Range
    8–12 years
    youth Scope
    focus
    country
    Iran
    setting
    Four urban primary schools in Kermanshah.
    sample Size
    randomized
    139
    analyzed
    102
    description
    Reported cohort/enrollment: 139. Analyzed/interviewed: 102.
    intervention
    description
    Abuse-focused CBT versus EMDR
    dose
    Up to 12 individual 45–60-minute sessions over 4–12 weeks; treatment-specific stopping rules.
    provider
    Two experienced CBT therapists and a trained EMDR practitioner.
    comparator
    CBT, EMDR and no-treatment control; all parents received psychoeducation.
    outcomes
    1. name
      Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms
      follow Up
      Two weeks after treatment
      result
      Active groups improved relative to control.
      effect Estimate
      Not recorded
      uncertainty
      Not established from accessed source.
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed source.
    2. name
      Classroom behavior and school performance
      follow Up
      Two weeks after treatment
      result
      No significant improvement reported.
      effect Estimate
      Not recorded
      uncertainty
      Not established from accessed source.
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed source.
    finding
    CBT and EMDR improved posttraumatic symptom scores relative to controls; classroom behavior and academic performance did not show clear benefit.
    limitation
    37/139 dropped out, with higher attrition in active arms. Analysis involved completers; alternating allocation details and baseline imbalance raise bias concerns. Follow-up was only two weeks.
    design
    type
    Randomized comparative trial with blinded assessment
    randomization Evidence
    Methods describe age/sex matching and drawing names from a hat while alternating assignments; concealment is uncertain.
    masking
    participants
    Not established from accessed source.
    providers
    Different therapy protocols were delivered; provider blinding not established.
    assessors
    Trained pre/post psychologists blinded to assignment.
    analysts
    Not established from accessed source.
    crosses
    1
    cross Rationale
    Randomized allocation is explicitly supported; double blinding is not established.
    quality
    risk Of Bias
    Important concerns: 37/139 dropped out, with higher attrition in active arms. Analysis involved completers; alternating allocation details and baseline imbalance raise bias concerns. Follow-up was only two weeks.
    attrition
    CBT15/40 dropped out; EMDR16/40; control 6/59. Total 102 analyzed.
    confounding
    Allocation, adherence, co-interventions and reporting limitations require consideration; see design and limitations.
    adverse Findings
    Ongoing violence contributed to dropout; formal adverse-event ascertainment not established.
    transfer Limits
    Do not extrapolate beyond the described population and intervention.
    jadad
    not established
    access
    level
    selected-methods
    source URLs

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
    sources
    1. url
      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/
      type
      PubMed XML bibliographic/abstract record
      retrieved At
      2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
      identity Verified
      true
      notes
      Title and PMID matched between Europe PMC core metadata and PubMed XML; DOI, authors and journal metadata retained.
    2. url
      https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620
      type
      Europe PMC core bibliographic/abstract record
      retrieved At
      2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
      identity Verified
      true
      notes
      Title and PMID matched between Europe PMC core metadata and PubMed XML; DOI, authors and journal metadata retained.
    3. url
      https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/
      type
      journal full text: selected methods/results
      retrieved At
      2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
      identity Verified
      true
      notes
      Title and PMID matched between Europe PMC core metadata and PubMed XML; DOI, authors and journal metadata retained.
    publication Status
    status
    Published journal report; no retraction/erratum relationship flagged in retrieved PubMed record.
    correction Retraction Check
    method
    Inspected PubMed publication types and CommentsCorrections relationships plus Europe PMC metadata.
    relationships
    None recorded
    checked At
    2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
    uncertainty
    Index metadata can lag; publisher Crossmark and trial-register reconciliation are not comprehensively verified.
    recommendation Rationale
    Adds controlled child/family treatment evidence; consider as a new candidate after human review.
    review
    status
    pending
    reviewer
    Not recorded
    assessment Status
    assessed
    assessment Notes
    Source-supported assessment with visible access limits; not a completed human approval or formal risk-of-bias instrument. This report does not represent an additional independent study when its family ID is shared.
    research Lane
    children
    review Ready
    true
    review Readiness
    ai-editorial-audit-complete-release-pending
    publication Recommendation
    status
    recommended-summary
    reason
    Suitable as a qualified research-library summary at the stated source-access level. This is not a conclusion that the intervention is effective or safe.
    scope
    Research summary only; no treatment recommendation
    human Release Approval
    false
    editorial Audit
    auditor
    Codex (AI)
    completed At
    2026-10-31T05:11:05.655793+00:00
    prior Content Hash
    60087713d51fbeaeb94741faf5b67df1c96575a6871111480fa510e4f2514916
    prior Revision
    r1-60087713d51f
    prior Source
    frozen-120
    source Verification
    id
    dv-children-31114620
    doi
    10.18502/ijps.v14i1.425
    pmid
    31114620
    fresh Metadata
    Europe PMC core
    metadata Retrieved
    true
    metadata SHA256
    68d32f4a32e25b1ddaec9a6a6dc88e7187a6cc9834e133fd46dea9a2b804a953
    claim Check
    Headline finding/design/limitations compared with indexed abstract or accessible primary evidence; retained methods amendments separately adjudicated.
    sources

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    applied Proposals
    None recorded
    method
    AI editorial assessment of all 130 publication records: compare identity, headline finding, design, relevance and limitations with indexed abstracts or available primary material; adjudicate retained source-supported methods amendments. This is a source-limited publication audit, not an independent full-text systematic review or a clinical guideline.
    limitations

    Abstract-only records do not establish allocation concealment, complete harms reporting or full risk of bias. · No formal independent RoB 2, GRADE appraisal or numerical reconstruction of every effect was performed. · Source-access labels describe retained appraisal evidence; fuller prior appraisals were checked through their source ledgers and selected material, not independently repeated in full. · Publication counts are not independent trial or participant counts; cohort links and overlapping review evidence remain provisional. · A randomized design cross does not indicate benefit, low risk of bias or human approval. No double-blind trial is verified in this release. · No professional clinical peer review is claimed. Recommended content is limited to accurately qualified research summaries.

    study Design Assessment
    category
    rct
    is Randomized Controlled Trial
    true
    basis
    Methods describe age/sex matching and drawing names from a hat while alternating assignments; concealment is uncertain.
    sources

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    review Scope
    selected-methods
    paper Trust Assessment
    scope
    Paper
    status
    assessed
    score
    2
    randomized Controlled Trial
    true
    peer Reviewed
    true
    blinding
    not-confirmed
    basis
    Randomized allocation is explicitly supported; double blinding is not established.
    sources

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    review Scope
    selected-methods
    human Approval
    false
    display Crosses
    1
    masking Roles
    participants
    Not established from accessed source.
    providers
    Different therapy protocols were delivered; provider blinding not established.
    assessors
    Trained pre/post psychologists blinded to assignment.
    analysts
    Not established from accessed source.
    jadad
    status
    unassessed
    score
    Not recorded
    evidence
    population
    relation
    direct
    population
    Schoolchildren physically abused in the family and/or witnessing parental/family violence.
    exposure Evidence
    Eligibility and interviews verified child physical abuse and/or family violence.
    rationale
    Direct study of a therapeutic intervention, its follow-up, or service engagement in children/families affected by domestic or interparental violence.
    transfer Limit
    Population and setting are specific; no inference of effectiveness for all survivors, ages or violence contexts.
    intervention
    description
    Abuse-focused CBT versus EMDR
    dose
    Up to 12 individual 45–60-minute sessions over 4–12 weeks; treatment-specific stopping rules.
    provider
    Two experienced CBT therapists and a trained EMDR practitioner.
    comparator
    CBT, EMDR and no-treatment control; all parents received psychoeducation.
    outcomes
    1. name
      Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms
      follow Up
      Two weeks after treatment
      result
      Active groups improved relative to control.
      effect Estimate
      Not recorded
      uncertainty
      Not established from accessed source.
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed source.
    2. name
      Classroom behavior and school performance
      follow Up
      Two weeks after treatment
      result
      No significant improvement reported.
      effect Estimate
      Not recorded
      uncertainty
      Not established from accessed source.
      primary Status
      Not established from accessed source.
    access
    level
    selected-methods
    source URLs

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

    retrieved At
    2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
    citation Snapshot
    count
    Not recorded
    source
    Not recorded
    retrieved At
    Not recorded
    status
    not-assessed
    provenance
    Discovered by AI
    content Hash
    b2ab0c4d2905ff690cc7aad8709e4e42b33fd88023cd942685a7363050276346
    revision
    audit-r2-b2ab0c4d2905
    archive Entries
    None recorded
    collection
    vision
    chapter Number
    7
    topic Id
    domestic-family-violence
    topic Title
    Domestic & Family Violence
    trust Score
    2
evidence
evidence Type
Randomized comparative trial with blinded assessment
intervention
Abuse-focused CBT versus EMDR Up to 12 individual 45–60-minute sessions over 4–12 weeks; treatment-specific stopping rules.
comparator
CBT, EMDR and no-treatment control; all parents received psychoeducation.
sample
Reported cohort/enrollment: 139. Analyzed/interviewed: 102.
measurement
Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms; Classroom behavior and school performance
timing
Two weeks after treatment
trial Id
relationship Note
Direct study of a therapeutic intervention, its follow-up, or service engagement in children/families affected by domestic or interparental violence. Population and setting are specific; no inference of effectiveness for all survivors, ages or violence contexts.
measured Genes
None recorded
pathways
None recorded
source Access
level
selected-methods
source URLs

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31114620/ · https://europepmc.org/article/MED/31114620 · https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505052/

retrieved At
2026-10-30T07:25:30.543090+00:00
outcomes
  1. name
    Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms
    follow Up
    Two weeks after treatment
    result
    Active groups improved relative to control.
    effect Estimate
    Not recorded
    uncertainty
    Not established from accessed source.
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed source.
  2. name
    Classroom behavior and school performance
    follow Up
    Two weeks after treatment
    result
    No significant improvement reported.
    effect Estimate
    Not recorded
    uncertainty
    Not established from accessed source.
    primary Status
    Not established from accessed source.
quality
risk Of Bias
Important concerns: 37/139 dropped out, with higher attrition in active arms. Analysis involved completers; alternating allocation details and baseline imbalance raise bias concerns. Follow-up was only two weeks.
attrition
CBT15/40 dropped out; EMDR16/40; control 6/59. Total 102 analyzed.
confounding
Allocation, adherence, co-interventions and reporting limitations require consideration; see design and limitations.
adverse Findings
Ongoing violence contributed to dropout; formal adverse-event ascertainment not established.
transfer Limits
Do not extrapolate beyond the described population and intervention.
jadad
not established
masking Roles
participants
Not established from accessed source.
providers
Different therapy protocols were delivered; provider blinding not established.
assessors
Trained pre/post psychologists blinded to assignment.
analysts
Not established from accessed source.
population
relation
direct
population
Schoolchildren physically abused in the family and/or witnessing parental/family violence.
exposure Evidence
Eligibility and interviews verified child physical abuse and/or family violence.
rationale
Direct study of a therapeutic intervention, its follow-up, or service engagement in children/families affected by domestic or interparental violence.
transfer Limit
Population and setting are specific; no inference of effectiveness for all survivors, ages or violence contexts.
jadad
status
unassessed
score
Not recorded
condition Evidence
  1. id
    trauma
    evidence
    1. field
      outcomes
      text
      Child/parent posttraumatic symptoms | Classroom behavior and school performance
      matched Text
      posttraumatic
    scope
    Study population or investigated outcome; not a diagnosis or efficacy claim.
conditions

trauma

topic Trust Scores

2

full Text
status
not-indexed
retrieval Available
false

Open this publication in the interactive library