Compiled by Kit Caless
The latest published international research on psychological trauma and beyond. Please note, some articles may require a subscription to access.
The overlooked trauma: psychological violence and its impact on PTSD symptoms
Gonçavles et al. (2026). European Journal of Psychotraumatology. doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2026.2649110
The DSM-5’s Criterion A restricts trauma recognition to direct exposure to death, serious injury, or sexual violence. Psychological violence, emotional abuse, humiliation, sustained intimidation, falls outside this definition, which means that people who develop PTSD presentations following such experiences may not qualify for a formal diagnosis.
530 Brazilian undergraduate students who had experienced psychological violence, crime, disaster, or physical and sexual violence were compared on PTSD symptom severity and probability of a probable diagnosis. Psychological violence was associated with greater PTSD symptom severity and higher odds of probable PTSD diagnosis than crime- or disaster-related trauma. The difference between psychological violence and physical or sexual violence did not reach statistical significance, which the authors interpret as evidence of comparable impact.
The results add to a growing body of work questioning whether Criterion A adequately captures the range of experiences that produce clinically significant trauma responses. Clinicians working with clients who present with PTSD symptomatology but no qualifying index event might find it useful to hold these findings in mind, particularly where the presenting history involves relational humiliation or emotional abuse.
Limitations include a small psychological violence group (n=61), which means the claim of equivalence with physical and sexual violence rests on a non-significant result that may simply reflect insufficient power. Psychological violence exposure is assessed via a single item added to the trauma history questionnaire, covering humiliation and ridicule only, which leaves coercive control and other forms unaddressed. The sample of 530 Brazilian undergraduates with a high background trauma rate limits generalisation in the main.
Treating dissociation in PTSD: a meta-analysis of psychological intervention studies
Akoral et al. (2026). Journal of Trauma & Dissociation. doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2026.2641635
Dissociation is common in PTSD and CPTSD, can interfere with engagement in trauma processing, and is under-recognised and under-targeted in clinical practice. Most prior research has examined dissociation as a predictor of how well clients respond to therapy (e.g., Hoeboer et al.’s 2020 meta-analysis, which found no evidence that dissociation moderates treatment effectiveness). This 2026 review shifts focus to ask a different question: do psychological treatments for PTSD actually reduce dissociation as a symptom? Thirteen controlled studies with 1,171 participants were included, covering trauma-focused, phase-based, and present-focused approaches.
The overall finding is a small treatment effect on dissociation. However, when the analysis is restricted to studies with active rather than waitlist control groups, the effect becomes non-significant. The authors state that on this basis, they cannot be confident that PTSD interventions reduce dissociation. Trauma-focused treatments showed a small significant effect in subgroup analysis, whereas phased and present-focused approaches did not. Dissociation was a secondary rather than primary outcome in almost all studies, meaning none of the included trials were designed to address dissociation directly. Nine of the twelve RCTs were rated as having medium or high risk of bias, and publication bias was detected.
The paper claims to be the first meta-analysis to examine dissociation as an outcome measure in controlled trials of psychological therapies for PTSD, which is exciting in and of itself. It highlights a clear gap in the literature, indicating a need for future clinical trials explicitly designed to evaluate targeted treatments for dissociative symptoms.
On poverty and trauma: associations between neighbourhood socioeconomic deprivation, PTSD severity and treatment response
Delgadillo & Richardson (2025). European Journal of Psychotraumatology. doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2025.2547549
This retrospective cohort study draws on electronic health records from patients treated for PTSD across sixteen NHS Talking Therapies services in England. Using the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) as a neighbourhood-level measure, the researchers examined whether socioeconomic deprivation was associated with PTSD prevalence, symptom severity at the point of referral, and response to treatment.
The findings are pretty direct. Three times as many PTSD cases were found in the most deprived quintile (fifth) compared to the least. Patients from deprived areas began treatment with more severe symptoms and showed poorer outcomes from therapy, unless they received a longer course of treatment, which actively mitigated the disadvantage.
The study uses a large NHS dataset, which gives the findings weight in UK clinical contexts. It shows a cumulative effect: people in deprived neighbourhoods face greater exposure to traumatic events, are more likely to develop PTSD, arrive at services with more severe presentations, and benefit less from standard-length interventions. The last of these is a commissioning question as much as a clinical one.
The finding that longer therapy moderated the disadvantage of deprivation has serious implications for how trauma services are resourced. Standard episode lengths are frequently set without reference to the social complexity of a patient’s life. This study provides grounds for arguing that those calculations need revision. As the study concludes, people in socioeconomically deprived areas experience higher trauma prevalence and severity at intake, yet are systematically less likely to benefit from standard therapeutic help unless treatment duration is extended. This paper was published in 2025 and is included here for its direct relevance to UK practice.
Residential therapy with navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation for combat-related PTSD: a randomised clinical trial
Fox et al. (2026). JAMA Network Open. doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.5110
This randomised, blinded trial tested whether adding personalised transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to a residential treatment programme improved outcomes for military personnel and veterans with combat-related PTSD. The trial enrolled 119 participants, most presenting with severe or extreme PTSD, at a specialist residential military mental health facility in Texas. Both arms received the same 30-day residential programme: massed prolonged exposure twice weekly plus daily therapeutic activities. The active arm received additional daily TMS (7 days a week for 20 consecutive days), targeted to each participant’s brain using individual structural and functional MRI data and delivered by robotic navigation. The sham arm received the same setup without active stimulation. Patients, staff, and assessors were all blinded to allocation.
Both arms showed significant symptom reduction from baseline. However, the active TMS arm showed superior results at the end of treatment, and this advantage widened across the follow-up period. At one month, 85% of active TMS recipients showed reliable clinical improvement compared to 59% of the sham group. By the three-month mark, this durability gap widened significantly, with 73% of the active group maintaining clinical improvements compared to less than 30% of the sham group. Improvements in comorbid depression symptoms followed a similar trajectory, appearing to persist in the active arm while sham arm participants showed a return of symptoms during follow-up.
The trial had an exceptionally low 5% dropout rate for PTSD intervention research. However, the sample was 90% male and drawn entirely from US military populations, which inherently limits how far these findings can translate to civilian or more demographically diverse trauma cohorts. On top of this, the MRI-based connectomic targeting approach and robotic stereotaxy are technically demanding and highly resource-intensive. The question of how this delivery model could practically scale within standard civilian outpatient configurations or NHS constraints remains to be seen. But the study establishes a decent proof of concept: brain-targeted neuromodulation, when layered over an already intensive psychological treatment protocol, can produce substantial, incremental, and far more durable symptom relief.
Psychotherapy for complex post-traumatic stress disorder: efficacy and therapeutic factors
Katalan, Unterrainer & Gelo (2026). Frontiers in Psychology. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1684921
This narrative review covers the current evidence base for psychotherapy in CPTSD, looking at both treatment outcomes and the relational conditions that make treatment possible. It evaluates CBT, DBT, EMDR, phase-based models, psychodynamic approaches, and integrative treatments, assessing each against CPTSD’s dual symptom structure: core PTSD symptoms and disturbances in self-organisation (DSO), which include affect dysregulation, negative self-concept, and chronic interpersonal difficulties.
The findings show that while evidence-based, front-line approaches such as TF-CBT and EMDR reliably reduce core PTSD symptoms, they demonstrate more variable and often smaller effects on disturbances in self-organisation, particularly in presentations involving childhood interpersonal trauma. Conversely, phase-based approaches that incorporate a dedicated stabilisation component prior to trauma processing appear to produce more consistent outcomes across both the PTSD and DSO symptom domains.
Psychodynamic therapy receives significantly more attention here than in most contemporary CPTSD reviews, which is what makes this study more significant than some others. The authors draw on a recent observational study in which 64% of CPTSD patients no longer met diagnostic criteria at the end of a multimodal psychodynamic inpatient programme, with self-organisation improvements remaining stable at a 24-month follow-up. These are notable figures for a disorder frequently characterised in the literature by its treatment resistance, and for a modality that is considered less ‘evidence-based’ than cognitive alternatives.
The review identifies the therapeutic alliance, trust, rupture repair, and the therapist’s capacity for affective attunement as vital mechanisms of change that operate across all modalities. It notes that these factors are systematically underrepresented in RCT designs, which tend to measure what manualised protocols produce rather than the relational conditions that make trauma processing safe and effective. The paper highlights a tension between the narrow parameters of evidence that RCTs can generate and the deep relational restructuring that CPTSD treatment requires. Because this is a narrative rather than a systematic review, its methodological conclusions are inherently limited; however, its value lies in its breadth and its engagement with psychodynamic and relational evidence as a necessary corrective to the protocol-dominated CPTSD literature.
When trauma crosses generations: mechanisms, clinical patterns and therapeutic implications of transgenerational trauma — a systematic review
Froń et al. (2026). Cells. doi.org/10.3390/cells15070609
This PRISMA-compliant systematic review synthesises 20 empirical studies on the biological and psychological pathways of transgenerational trauma transmission. Drawing on foundational Holocaust survivor research, the review details how maternal PTSD is associated with higher methylation of the NR3C1 glucocorticoid receptor gene in offspring reducing stress receptor sensitivity and increasing vulnerability to anxiety and depression. Conversely, paternal PTSD produces a distinct methylation pattern tied to insecure attachment predispositions. Offspring of parents with PTSD also display lower baseline cortisol levels, indicating a hypersensitive stress inhibitory system rather than resilience, while veterans with PTSD exhibit accelerated epigenetic ageing via the GrimAge marker.
The authors note that the evidence cannot fully confirm transmission across three generations. A landmark meta-analysis of Holocaust survivor grandchildren found no systematic evidence of tertiary traumatisation, suggesting that resilience and selection effects complicate straightforward transmission models, leaving third-generation data methodologically heterogeneous and contradictory. On the therapeutic side, several RCTs show that relational and family-based interventions like narrative exposure therapy and infant mental health home visiting are associated with measurable shifts in DNA methylation. This suggests that early childhood represents a window of epigenetic plasticity where caregiving quality can shape gene expression, highlighting relational intervention as a primary mechanism for interrupting intergenerational trauma.
If you have a paper or ongoing study that is of interest to the UKPTS community and would like it featured, get in touch using our contact form.
