↓ Skip to main content

The Effectiveness of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing Integrative Group Protocol with Adolescent Survivors of the Central Italy Earthquake

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Effectiveness of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing Integrative Group Protocol with Adolescent Survivors of the Central Italy Earthquake
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01826
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giada Maslovaric, Maria Zaccagnino, Clarice Mezzaluna, Sava Perilli, Denis Trivellato, Vittorio Longo, Cristina Civilotti

Abstract

Earthquakes, which can cause widespread territorial and socio-economic destruction, are life-threatening, unexpected, unpredictable, and uncontrollable events caused by the shaking of the surface of the earth. The psychological consequences, such as PTSD, anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation, are well-known to clinicians and researchers. This study was conducted with the aim of evaluating the use of the Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) Integrative Group Treatment Protocol on a sample of adolescents, after the earthquake in Central Italy on 24 August 2016. The objective of the EMDR intervention was to reduce PTSD symptoms. Before and after EMDR, specific assessment to find changes in PTSD symptoms was made using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised and through the analyses of the Subjective Units of Disturbance. The EMDR treatment was given in three sessions (T1, T2, and T3), each lasting 90 min, and the results at follow-up phase (T4) were also monitored. The results are very encouraging, showing significantly reduced PTSD symptoms in the majority of the subjects. The clinical implications and limitations will be discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 7 8%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 30 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 40 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 5%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 31 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 October 2017.
All research outputs
#17,918,662
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,749
of 30,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,557
of 327,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#484
of 607 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,882 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 607 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.