AGAnouk W. Gathier

Anouk W. Gathier

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article

Previous Organizations / Institutes

The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years


Anouk W. Gathier has a total of 18 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:

  • Christiaan H. Vinkers

    Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Psychiatry, Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health, Mental Health Program, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Neuroscience, Mood, Anxiety, Psychosis, Sleep & Stress Program, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; GGZ inGeest Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    2 shared publications
  • Josine E. Verhoeven

    Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Psychiatry, Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health, Mental Health Program, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; GGZ inGeest Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    2 shared publications
  • Patricia C. van Oppen

    Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Psychiatry, Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health, Mental Health Program, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; GGZ inGeest Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    2 shared publications
  • Brenda W. J. H. Penninx

    Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    1 shared publication
  • Brenda W.J.H. Penninx

    Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Psychiatry, Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health, Mental Health Program, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Neuroscience, Mood, Anxiety, Psychosis, Sleep & Stress Program, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    1 shared publication
  • Carmen M. M. van Den Bulck

    Altrecht GGZ, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    1 shared publication

Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    The role of explicit and implicit self-esteem in the relationship between childhood trauma and adult depression and anxiety

    by Anouk W. Gathier, Lonneke A. van Tuijl, Brenda W.J.H. Penninx, Peter J. de Jong, Patricia C. van Oppen, Christiaan H. Vinkers, Josine E. Verhoeven


  • Open Access

    Design and rationale of the REStoring mood after early life trauma with psychotherapy (RESET-psychotherapy) study: a multicenter randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of adjunctive trauma-focused therapy (TFT) versus treatment as usual (TAU) for adult patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and childhood trauma

    by Anouk W. Gathier, Josine E. Verhoeven, Patricia C. van Oppen, Brenda W. J. H. Penninx, Maarten J. M. Merkx, Pieter Dingemanse, Kim M. K. S. Stehouwer, Carmen M. M. van Den Bulck, Christiaan H. Vinkers

    Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common, recurrent mental disorder and a leading cause of disability worldwide.A large part of adult MDD patients report a history of childhood trauma (CT). Patients with MDD and CT are assumed to represent a clinically and neurobiologically distinct MDD subtype with an earlier onset, unfavorable disease course, stress systems’ dysregulations and brain alterations. Currently, there is no evidence-based treatment strategy for MDD that specifically targets CT. Given the central role of trauma in MDD patients with CT, trauma-focused therapy (TFT), adjunctive to treatment as usual (TAU), may be efficacious to alleviate depressive symptoms in this patient population.Methods: The RESET-psychotherapy study is a 12-week, single-blind, randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of TFT in 158 adults with moderate to severe MDD, as a ‘stand-alone’ depression diagnosis or superimposed on a persistent depressive disorder (PDD), and CT. TFT (6–10 sessions of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing and/or imagery rescripting) + TAU is compared to TAU only. Assessments, including a wide range of psychological/psychiatric and biological characteristics, take place before randomization (T0), during treatment (T1), at post-treatment (T2) and at 6-month follow-up (T3). Pre-post treatment stress-related biomarkers in hair (cortisol) and blood (epigenetics and inflammation) will be assessed to better understand working mechanisms of TFT. A subgroup of 60 participants will undergo structural and functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) assessments to determine pre-post treatment brain activity. The primary outcome is self-reported depression symptom severity at post-treatment, measured with the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology – Self Report (IDS-SR).Discussion: If adjunctive TFT efficaciously alleviates depressive symptoms in MDD patients with CT, this novel treatment strategy could pave the way for a more personalized and targeted MDD treatment.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, registered at 08–12-2021, number of identification: NCT05149352.


  • Open Access

    Clinicians’ perspective on the implemented KLIK PROM portal in clinical practice

    by Lorynn Teela, Maud M. van Muilekom, Lieke H. Kooij, Anouk W. Gathier, Johannes B. van Goudoever, Martha A. Grootenhuis, Lotte Haverman, Hedy A. van Oers

    Purpose: Since 2011, the evidence-based KLIK Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) portal has been implemented in clinical practice in > 20 Dutch hospitals. Patients and/or parents complete PROMs on Health Related Quality of Life, symptoms and psychosocial functioning before their outpatient consultation. Answers are converted into an ePROfile and discussed by clinicians during consultation to monitor well-being over time and detect problems early. This study aims to get insight into the KLIK implementation from the clinician’s perspective. Methods: As part of the KLIK implementation process, annual meetings were held with multidisciplinary teams to evaluate the use of KLIK. An online questionnaire was sent regarding (1) overall satisfaction, (2) feeling competent to discuss PROMs, (3) use of KLIK during the consultation, (4) influence of KLIK on the consultation, (5) usability of the KLIK PROM portal, (6) satisfaction with PROMs and feedback, and (7) support of the KLIK expert team. Open questions about (dis)advantages were included. Descriptive analyses were used. Results: One hundred and forty-eight clinicians (response-rate 61%) from 14 hospitals in the Netherlands participated. Results show that: (1) clinicians report an overall satisfaction of median = 69/100 (visual analogue scale), (2) 85.8% feel competent discussing the ePROfile, (3) 70.3% (almost) always discuss the ePROfile, (4) 70.3% think that KLIK improves consultation, (5) 71.6% think KLIK is easy to use, (6) 80.4% are satisfied with the feedback of the overall KLIK ePROfile, (7) 71.6% experience sufficient support of the KLIK team. Conclusion: Participating clinicians are generally satisfied with KLIK. Improvements to the KLIK PROM portal are now realized based on the mentioned disadvantages (e.g., shorten PROM completion by use of PROMIS and integrating KLIK with Electronic Health Records).