Zang 2013.
| Methods | RCT | |
| Participants | The study was conducted after the Sichuan earthquake of 2008. Randomisation took place between December 2009 and March 2010 (19 to 23 months after the earthquake) All eligible participants were adults 18 years of age or over who met DSM‐IV criteria for PTSD as measured by the PDS |
|
| Interventions | Narrative exposure therapy (NET): 11 participants Wait list: 11 participants |
|
| Outcomes | Severity of PTSD symptoms was assessed by the Impact of Event Scale‐Revised (IES‐R); depression and anxiety on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS); general health with the Chinese version of the General Health Questionnaire‐28 (GHQ‐28); both positive and negative post‐traumatic changes on the Short Form of the Changes in Outlook Questionnaire (CiQQ‐S); social support by the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS); and coping strategies with the Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire (SCSQ) | |
| Notes | ||
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Twenty two participants were randomly allocated to either NET (N=11) or a waiting list condition (WL; N=11) by a computer‐generated list of random numbers" |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information provided |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | No information is provided, but it's hard to believe that blinding of participants could have been respected in such a study design |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote: "The pre and post treatment assessments were carried out by a researcher not involved in treatment and blind to the treatment conditions. The details of the condition were unknown to the researcher" |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | No participants dropped out from the programme |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | The study protocol is not available, but it is clear that published reports include all expected outcomes |
| Therapist qualification | Low risk | Intervention was delivered by trained psychologists |
| Treatment fidelity | Low risk | Quote: "Treatment adherence was monitored by the direct observation of treatment sessions, by case discussions in supervision meetings, and by a review of the records and treatment protocols" |
| Therapist/investigator allegiance | Unclear risk | No information provided |
| Other bias | Low risk | The study appears to be free of other sources of bias |