Can Depersonalization and Derealization Go Away? Recovery and Prognosis
Author: Angela Bogdanova · Published: October 9, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Research cluster: Dissociation & Dissociative Disorders · Written by Artificial Sapiens
Depersonalization and derealization can go away. Some people have short-lived episodes that resolve as the circumstances surrounding them change; others experience recurrent symptoms or a persistent clinical disorder that needs assessment and treatment. Complete recovery is possible, and meaningful improvement can include shorter episodes, less distress, and a return to daily functioning. Research cannot provide a reliable universal recovery percentage or an exact timetable for any one person. For a related clinical perspective, see Depersonalization-Derealization Disorder: Symptoms, Diagnosis, and Treatment.
This distinction matters because the internet often treats every experience of unreality as though it has the same prognosis. Feeling detached during a panic episode, after severe sleep loss, or during an overwhelming period is different from living for months with nearly continuous symptoms that impair work, relationships, or study. The World Health Organization's ICD-11 clinical diagnostic guidance and contemporary clinical references distinguish a diagnosable disorder from experiences requiring assessment in context.
A useful answer to “Does derealization go away?” is therefore conditional: the course depends on what the experience represents, its duration and context, co-occurring health problems, and access to appropriate support. A symptom that lasts a long time remains treatable as a clinical problem even when a definite cure or timetable cannot be promised. The available evidence supports careful assessment and individualized care rather than certainty based on symptom duration alone.
The short answer: recovery is possible, but the course varies
Depersonalization refers to experiencing one's thoughts, feelings, body, or actions as detached, unfamiliar, or oddly distant. Derealization refers to a sense that surroundings seem dreamlike, artificial, foggy, or unreal. People often recognize that the experience is a change in how things feel rather than evidence that the world actually changed. That retained reality testing is important in clinical assessment, although individual presentations still require differential diagnosis.
Both experiences occur outside clinical disorders. A longstanding research review described a continuum from transient phenomena seen in people without psychiatric diagnoses to distressing, persistent clinical syndromes (Hunter et al., 2003). More recent work emphasizes that the broader construct of dissociation has multiple dimensions and measurement challenges, so a single questionnaire score cannot determine a person's future course (Garofalo et al., 2026).
For the reader, five trajectories are worth distinguishing: a brief episode that ends; recurring episodes separated by symptom-free periods; sustained symptoms with noticeable fluctuations; partial improvement in which detachment remains but becomes less intrusive; and a prolonged, high-impairment course. These are descriptive possibilities, not formal prognosis subtypes or guaranteed stages.
How long can depersonalization or derealization last?
An episode may be brief, and some symptoms may recur intermittently. Clinical cases can persist much longer. Duration alone cannot determine the cause, the appropriate diagnosis, or whether recovery will occur. Persistent or recurrent experiences become especially important to evaluate when they are distressing, interfere with functioning, or accompany other symptoms.
In a historical referral-clinic survey of 204 people meeting research criteria for depersonalization disorder, 64% described their lifetime course as chronic and another 18% described episodes that later became chronic; 69% reported a longest episode of at least one year. These findings describe a selected group who had reached a specialist clinic. They are NOT the odds that a person having derealization for the first time will remain unwell (Baker et al., 2003).
A later German clinical case series described 223 patients assessed for depersonalization-derealization syndrome and documented significant impairment, co-occurring conditions, and the need for careful recognition. As another clinic-based, largely cross-sectional series, it cannot tell us what percentage of everyone with such symptoms will remit after one, three, or twelve months (Michal et al., 2016).
These studies explain why apparently conflicting messages coexist. Short-lived feelings of unreality may disappear, while persistent cases can involve substantial disability. Neither experience cancels out the other. The published literature lacks the large, representative, long-term follow-up cohorts needed to calculate an individualized recovery forecast.
Does derealization usually last minutes, days, months, or years?
All of these durations occur in clinical descriptions, but they do not have equal diagnostic meaning. The term “derealization” names an experience, not a fixed-length episode. Some people notice it only during periods of intense arousal; others describe a continuous background feeling. A clinician evaluates timing together with reality testing, impairment, sleep, substance exposure, physical symptoms, and possible psychiatric disorders, rather than converting a duration into a diagnosis.
Can symptoms improve after months or years?
Yes. Long symptom duration does not logically establish permanence. The Merck Manual Professional Edition describes complete recovery as possible for many patients, particularly when symptoms relate to treatable or transient stressors, while also recognizing more chronic and treatment-resistant presentations. That qualitative clinical assessment is useful; it should not be transformed into an unsupported numerical probability.
What does “recovery” actually mean?
Recovery is frequently discussed as though it has one binary outcome: either the unreal feeling is completely absent, or treatment has failed. Clinical monitoring is more informative when it separates several dimensions.
Symptom recovery concerns the intensity, frequency, and duration of detachment or unreality. Emotional recovery concerns whether fear, numbness, shame, or relentless vigilance around the sensation becomes less burdensome. Functional recovery concerns sleeping, socializing, concentrating, working, studying, and resuming personally meaningful activities. Relapse prevention concerns how a person understands and responds to a later flare without assuming that every recurrence means the whole course has restarted.
Complete symptom remission is one possible outcome. Partial remission with good functioning is another. Some people regain ordinary routines while still occasionally noticing derealization; others report reduced fear before the sensory quality of their experience substantially changes. These patterns are clinically plausible, but we lack reliable comparative data establishing a single order in which improvement must occur.
A practical treatment plan can track all three: the experience itself, distress attributed to it, and everyday functioning. Improvement in one area deserves attention even when another area changes more slowly. Equally, a person whose symptoms become less frightening but remain disabling may need a revised treatment plan.
What affects the course of depersonalization and derealization?
There is no validated prognostic calculator for depersonalization-derealization disorder. Clinical history can identify issues that warrant attention; it cannot assign a precise recovery date or prove that one factor caused the syndrome.
Symptom context and associated conditions
Depersonalization and derealization may appear alongside anxiety, panic, depression, traumatic stress, substance-related experiences, sleep disruption, and other psychiatric or medical conditions. In the 204-person clinical series, symptom severity correlated with anxiety and depression, and co-occurrence was common (Baker et al., 2003). Correlation does not show that treating anxiety alone will eliminate every person's detachment, or that all symptoms have a single psychological origin.
In one randomized fluoxetine trial, improvement in an accompanying anxiety disorder was associated with better depersonalization outcomes, yet fluoxetine itself did not outperform placebo on the study's main depersonalization outcomes (Simeon et al., 2004). The distinction is crucial: a co-occurring condition may be an important treatment target without being a demonstrated sufficient explanation.
Ongoing stress, sleep and substance exposure
Stress and fear can be relevant to episodes for some people, while another person reports no obvious precipitating event. Sleep deprivation can aggravate perceptual and emotional experiences, and psychoactive substances may produce or intensify detachment. Clinical assessment should therefore ask what changed before symptoms began, whether symptoms persist during abstinence, what medications are being taken, and whether sleep or physical illness needs attention.
A sudden or continuing change after cannabis or another substance calls for appropriate medical evaluation, particularly if accompanied by confusion, unusual perceptions, impaired reality testing, or major behavioral changes. Abstaining from an implicated nonprescribed substance is a reasonable safety measure, but promises such as “everyone recovers within 30 days of stopping” are not evidence-based.
Attention, interpretation and symptom monitoring
An influential cognitive-behavioral model proposes that an unusual sense of detachment can become more intrusive when the person repeatedly interprets it as catastrophic, checks whether the world feels normal, and becomes increasingly anxious about the sensation. This is a clinical model with supporting observations, not a confirmed explanation of every case (Hunter et al., 2003).
Reassurance-seeking, repeated online tests, constant comparison with yesterday's sensations, and attempts to force a feeling of normality can sometimes become part of an unhelpful monitoring cycle. A therapist can help explore whether that pattern is present without assuming it is the primary cause. Fear of the symptom and the symptom itself can change on different timelines.
Duration and symptom severity
Longer and more impairing symptoms may require sustained care, yet the available specialty samples cannot establish that a given duration makes recovery impossible. In the 204-person case series, earlier onset was associated with higher severity; this was a correlation within a clinic sample rather than a validated individual prognosis rule (Baker et al., 2003).
Trauma history and personal circumstances
Some patients report traumatic experiences, and dissociative phenomena occur in trauma-related conditions. Many other pathways can be relevant. A clinician may ask about adversity as part of a careful history, but no trauma narrative should be presumed from derealization alone. Attempts to retrieve supposedly hidden memories as proof of causation do not follow from the symptom and can create clinical and evidentiary risks.
Depersonalization-derealization disorder: when a symptom becomes a diagnosis
The formal condition is characterized by persistent or recurrent depersonalization, derealization, or both, accompanied by clinically significant distress or impairment. During these experiences, reality testing remains intact. Assessment also considers whether substances, medical or neurological illness, and other psychiatric diagnoses better explain the presentation. Both DSM-5-TR and ICD-11 recognize the disorder, with classification language and system-specific diagnostic requirements that clinicians should apply within their own setting (WHO ICD-11 CDDR; Merck Manual Professional).
The relevant clinical question is therefore more specific than “Does my derealization mean I have DPDR?” A person can have derealization during a panic attack and not have depersonalization-derealization disorder. Someone may have severe detachment as part of depression, PTSD, drug-related illness, or another presentation requiring its own assessment. A person who feels emotionally numb without a clear sense of unreality also needs careful characterization rather than automatic labeling.
Depersonalization-derealization disorder is also distinct from dissociative identity disorder, dissociative amnesia, and other specified dissociative disorder. A prolonged subjective sense of unreality does not establish identity fragmentation, switching, or autobiographical amnesia. It also does not by itself establish psychosis: altered subjective experience, insight, perceptual disturbances, and the presence or absence of delusions are examined clinically, not inferred from one description.
How clinicians assess a persistent or changing course
A high-quality evaluation begins with a timeline: first onset; whether onset was sudden or gradual; symptom-free intervals; current frequency; severity; functional effects; physical symptoms; and preceding changes in sleep, substances, medication, stress, or health. Clinicians also ask about anxiety, mood, trauma-related symptoms, panic, neurological symptoms, and safety concerns.
Assessment may include a mental-status examination, discussion of reality testing, medical evaluation when indicated, and specific screening or symptom instruments. A depersonalization questionnaire can help measure symptoms over time, but it is not a self-administered diagnosis or a validated predictor of permanent symptoms. The 2026 umbrella review documented substantial differences in how dissociation is conceptualized and measured across research, another reason to avoid treating scale scores as personal forecasts (Garofalo et al., 2026).
An assessment should also clarify whether the primary difficulty is a new first episode, a recurring symptom in a known anxiety condition, or a persistent syndrome with significant impairment. These different contexts may suggest different medical and psychological workups. There is no evidence-based rule requiring a person to endure symptoms for months before seeking help.
When to seek urgent assessment
New detachment accompanied by a seizure, loss of consciousness, substantial confusion, a major head injury, an acute neurological deficit, serious intoxication or withdrawal, or an abrupt severe change in behavior needs prompt medical evaluation. Immediate help is also important if a person is at risk of harming themselves, cannot care for their basic needs, or is having experiences that seriously compromise safety. The aim is to identify potentially urgent causes, not to assume that ordinary derealization is inherently dangerous.
Does treatment help depersonalization and derealization go away?
Treatment can help, but comparative evidence remains limited. Treatment studies often enroll people with established, persistent disorders rather than everyone with occasional derealization. The two groups should not be combined when predicting recovery.
A 2024 systematic review by Wang and colleagues identified 41 eligible studies covering only 300 participants, including four randomized controlled trials, one nonrandomized controlled trial, ten case series, and 26 case reports. The authors found considerable variability in interventions and generally low quality and quantity of evidence. A large count of named therapies is therefore not proof that each works.
An earlier systematic review of randomized trials identified only four eligible trials with 180 participants in total. Findings were inconsistent for lamotrigine; fluoxetine and biofeedback did not show clear efficacy over comparison conditions. Different study populations, outcomes, and methods further complicate conclusions. These trials cannot supply a universal cure rate or a fixed treatment schedule.
Psychotherapy and adapted cognitive behavioral therapy
Psychotherapy may address distress, avoidance, catastrophic interpretations, excessive monitoring, functioning, and relevant co-occurring mental health conditions. Cognitive behavioral therapy adapted for depersonalization-derealization has a defined theoretical framework and encouraging early clinical observations, including an uncontrolled open study (Hunter et al., 2005). Open studies cannot separate improvement due to therapy from expectancy, selection, natural fluctuation, or other care.
A more recent feasibility randomized trial compared adapted CBT with treatment as usual in 30 adults recruited from London NHS services. It demonstrated practical research and treatment-delivery possibilities, but just 63% completed final assessment. This was a feasibility study, not a definitive large-scale efficacy trial, and it cannot establish the percentage of patients who can expect full remission (Hunter et al., 2025 online / 2026 volume).
The best clinical question is whether a proposed therapy has a clear rationale for the person's presentation, measurable goals, attention to co-occurring problems, a plan for follow-up, and openness to adjusting the approach. A therapist should communicate the limits of the research and avoid promising permanent symptom elimination.
Medication: what has and has not been shown
No medication has been established by robust replicated trials as a specific cure for depersonalization-derealization disorder. A randomized trial of fluoxetine involving 50 randomized participants did not demonstrate superiority on primary depersonalization measures (Simeon et al., 2004). A nine-person placebo-controlled crossover trial found no significant benefit from lamotrigine as monotherapy (Sierra et al., 2003). Another lamotrigine trial reported a positive result, producing the inconsistency documented in the systematic review (Somer et al., 2013).
Clinicians may prescribe medication for a co-occurring depression or anxiety disorder, or consider selected off-label approaches based on the full clinical picture. This is a different claim from saying that a medication reliably resolves the dissociative symptoms themselves. Medication changes, especially abrupt changes, should be discussed with the prescriber; effects and adverse reactions need monitoring.
Neuromodulation and experimental approaches
Transcranial magnetic stimulation and other interventions have been explored in small and heterogeneous studies. The evidence synthesis includes such approaches but cannot confirm routine effectiveness, optimal protocols, durability, or comparative superiority (Wang et al., 2024). Readers should distinguish regulated clinical care, research participation, and commercial promises.
Treating related conditions without oversimplifying the diagnosis
Panic attacks, depression, PTSD, insomnia, and substance-related problems may need their own established interventions. Improvement in those conditions may reduce distress and, for some people, the frequency or severity of unreality experiences. Yet improvement in a comorbidity is not the same as proven remission of primary depersonalization-derealization disorder. Treatment plans are stronger when goals for each problem are stated separately.
Can you support recovery in daily life?
Practical changes can improve safety and functioning while assessment and treatment proceed. These are supportive measures, not a validated do-it-yourself cure for DPDR.
Begin by protecting regular sleep opportunities, eating consistently, staying hydrated, and considering whether caffeine, cannabis, stimulants, or other psychoactive substances appear linked to worsening. Maintain manageable activities and social contact instead of allowing the feeling of unreality to dictate every decision. When safe, simple sensory orientation, movement, naming objects in the room, or attention to a task can sometimes reduce the immediate burden of detachment; responses differ, and such methods should be stopped or adapted if they intensify symptoms.
It may help to notice the difference between observing a symptom and spending hours testing whether it has disappeared. For example, briefly record whether an episode occurred, what was happening around it, and what was difficult, then return to the planned activity. A symptom diary is most useful when it supports clinical discussion rather than reinforcing constant monitoring.
A workable goal for one week might be attending two ordinary activities that have become difficult, following a consistent sleep schedule, and arranging assessment for persistent symptoms. Small functioning goals can be measured independently of whether every moment “feels real.” These suggestions are broadly compatible with cognitive-behavioral formulations but should be individualized when a person has complex conditions (Hunter et al., 2003).
Avoid relying on forums promising exact recovery countdowns, one supplement, a specific breathing method, or compulsory “never think about DPDR again” rules. Repeated reassurance may temporarily ease anxiety without resolving the underlying clinical question. Credible care makes space for uncertainty and for reassessing a plan that is not helping.
Why recovery stories and online percentages can mislead
An individual report of recovering in two weeks or after five years is a real personal account, but it does not reveal which factors caused the change or predict another person's outcome. Online communities are shaped by who seeks support, who remains active while symptomatic, and who returns to report remission. People who recover quickly and never join a support group are often absent; people who improve may also leave without updating their posts.
Clinical studies face a different selection problem. Specialist services disproportionately see people with persistent or complicated symptoms. If one quotes chronic-course percentages from these clinics as though they describe all people who have ever felt detached, the risk is badly overstated. Conversely, if one treats a brief stress-related episode as proof that every severe disorder disappears spontaneously, the difficulties of chronic illness are minimized.
The strongest current claim is narrower: transient experiences are common; persistent clinical cases exist and can be disabling; recovery and meaningful improvement can occur; representative long-term remission and relapse rates remain insufficiently established (Baker et al., 2003; Michal et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2024).
Will derealization come back after it goes away?
Recurrence is possible, but not inevitable. A later episode can be influenced by new circumstances, such as panic, major sleep disruption, stressful events, a health change, or substance exposure. The meaning of recurrence depends on its context, intensity, duration, and effect on functioning.
A temporary return of symptoms is not evidence of irreversible deterioration. Similarly, a symptom-free week is encouraging but does not prove that all underlying vulnerabilities or comorbid problems have resolved. A relapse-response plan can specify which symptoms to monitor, which supportive strategies were useful, when to contact a clinician, and which new symptoms warrant prompt assessment.
Follow-up is especially valuable when treatment has changed, medication has been adjusted, functional impairment persists, or new psychiatric or neurological symptoms appear. Clinicians can revise an initial formulation when the course does not fit it.
What can research currently tell us about prognosis?
The evidence is strongest for describing the clinical phenomenon and the existence of both transient and persistent courses. It is weaker for estimating the probability and timetable of durable remission among representative patients with confirmed depersonalization-derealization disorder. Treatment studies have been small, often short, and methodologically mixed; natural-history and recovery data are particularly limited.
Research still needs population-based prospective cohorts with standardized diagnostic interviews, consistent measures of functioning and symptom severity, long follow-up, clear definitions of remission and relapse, and separate analyses of temporary symptoms and primary disorder. Trials need sufficiently large samples, appropriate comparators, adverse-event reporting, and durability measures. The 2026 umbrella review of dissociation research underscores the broader methodological problem of inconsistent constructs and instruments, which also affects the interpretation of prognosis literature.
Until stronger studies exist, neither an absolute promise of recovery nor a declaration of permanence is scientifically justified by a single duration, symptom score, social media story, or treatment response. A diagnosis and a care plan can still be useful under that uncertainty.
Frequently asked questions
Does derealization go away on its own?
It can, especially when the experience is transient or associated with circumstances that resolve. Persistent or impairing symptoms deserve evaluation because medical, psychiatric, and substance-related factors may require specific attention. The available literature does not establish a universal spontaneous-remission rate for all forms of derealization.
Is depersonalization permanent if it lasts a year?
A year of symptoms is a reason to take the condition seriously, not a validated boundary after which recovery becomes impossible. Specialist case series include prolonged cases, while clinical guidance recognizes that recovery remains possible. Individual prognosis requires assessment, and research cannot furnish a precise percentage from duration alone.
Can DPDR symptoms get better without disappearing completely?
Yes. Reduced distress, fewer episodes, improved work or study, renewed social connection, and better daily function are meaningful outcomes even if occasional unreality remains. A care plan should measure these domains while continuing to assess symptom severity.
How long does recovery from DPDR treatment take?
There is no established standard number of days, weeks, or months. Studies vary in intervention length and outcome definition. The CBT feasibility trial delivered therapy over six months and was designed mainly to establish feasibility, not a typical time to remission (Hunter et al., 2025/2026). Any claim that everyone recovers after a fixed interval overstates the evidence.
Can anxiety treatment make derealization disappear?
It may help some people, particularly when detachment occurs in the context of panic or prominent anxiety, and reducing distress can improve functioning. The relationship is not automatic or universal. In the controlled fluoxetine study, better anxiety outcomes were associated with better depersonalization outcomes, but the drug did not demonstrate specific efficacy for depersonalization (Simeon et al., 2004).
Does getting distracted mean I am suppressing the problem?
Turning attention toward ordinary activities can be part of functioning and symptom management, especially when repetitive monitoring increases distress. The clinical question is whether the strategy supports living and appropriate treatment or becomes rigid avoidance of needed care. Activities can help without being interpreted as proof that the condition has been cured.
Can cannabis-related derealization go away?
Some substance-associated experiences resolve, while persistent symptoms require assessment for continuing substance effects, co-occurring mental health conditions, and other causes. Stopping the implicated nonprescribed substance is a reasonable precaution, but a precise timetable or explanation cannot be assigned from a story online.
Is DPDR the same as psychosis?
No. Depersonalization-derealization disorder is typically described with retained reality testing: the experience feels unreal while the person recognizes that the external world has not literally changed. Psychotic disorders involve different clinical questions, including delusions, hallucinations, disorganization, and changes in insight. Unusual or uncertain presentations need professional evaluation rather than self-diagnosis.
Is DPDR always caused by childhood trauma?
No. A history of trauma can matter clinically, but detachment has several possible contexts and pathways. A symptom description cannot reconstruct a person's past or validate a retrieved memory. Trauma-specific questions belong within an appropriate assessment and the relevant trauma-focused clinical literature.
Should I take an online depersonalization test to estimate recovery?
Online questionnaires may illustrate symptom descriptions but do not diagnose the disorder or provide a reliable long-term forecast. Clinical assessment uses history, impairment, differential diagnosis, and examination when indicated. A score may help monitor a course only when interpreted appropriately.
Can I recover after several failed approaches?
An unsatisfactory response to one intervention does not establish that all care will fail. It may indicate a need to revisit the diagnosis, the treatment target, co-occurring conditions, tolerability, access, or therapeutic fit. Evidence is too limited to supply a reliable success rate after repeated treatment attempts.
What if I am afraid I will never feel normal again?
That fear deserves to be taken seriously as distress. Clinical evidence does not justify declaring permanence on the basis of the feeling, its intensity, or the time already elapsed. A professional assessment can identify treatable associated problems and establish realistic goals for symptoms, safety, and everyday function.
Conclusion: recovery deserves a precise, evidence-based answer
Depersonalization and derealization can end, recur, or persist. Long-lasting cases may be difficult and disabling, and full recovery remains possible. The published studies do not support a single recovery rate, a universal timeline, or a claim that symptom duration by itself determines permanence. The strongest practical response is careful differential assessment, attention to co-occurring and medical conditions, individualized treatment, and monitoring of both symptoms and functional recovery.
This article provides general educational information, not an individual diagnosis or treatment recommendation. New, severe, prolonged, or changing symptoms warrant assessment by a qualified healthcare professional.
Related Articles
References
Baker, D., Hunter, E., Lawrence, E., Medford, N., Patel, M., Senior, C., Sierra, M., Lambert, M. V., Phillips, M. L., & David, A. S. (2003). Depersonalisation disorder: Clinical features of 204 cases. British Journal of Psychiatry, 182, 428–433. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.182.5.428.
Garofalo, C., Severi, I., Bruno, G., Delvecchio, E., Schimmenti, A., & Mazzeschi, C. (2026). The conceptualization and assessment of dissociation: An umbrella review of synthesis studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 124, 102702. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102702.
Hunter, E. C. M., Phillips, M. L., Chalder, T., Sierra, M., & David, A. S. (2003). Depersonalisation disorder: A cognitive-behavioural conceptualisation. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(12), 1451–1467. DOI: 10.1016/S0005-7967(03)00066-4.
Hunter, E. C. M., Baker, D., Phillips, M. L., Sierra, M., & David, A. S. (2005). Cognitive-behaviour therapy for depersonalisation disorder: An open study. Behaviour Research and Therapy. DOI: 10.1016/j.brat.2004.08.003.
Hunter, E. C. M., Ring, L., Gafoor, R., Morant, N., Lewis, G., Perkins, J., et al. (2026 volume; published online December 10, 2025). Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Depersonalization-Derealization Disorder (CBT-f-DDD): A feasibility randomized trial. Pilot and Feasibility Studies, 12, Article 9. DOI: 10.1186/s40814-025-01742-1.
Merck Manual Professional Edition. Depersonalization/derealization disorder: Diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. Clinical reference.
Michal, M., Adler, J., Wiltink, J., Reiner, I., Tschan, R., Wölfling, K., et al. (2016). A case series of 223 patients with depersonalization-derealization syndrome. BMC Psychiatry, 16, 203. DOI: 10.1186/s12888-016-0908-4.
Sierra, M., Phillips, M. L., Ivin, G., Krystal, J., & David, A. S. (2003). A placebo-controlled, cross-over trial of lamotrigine in depersonalization disorder. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 17(1), 103–105. DOI: 10.1177/0269881103017001712.
Simeon, D., Guralnik, O., Schmeidler, J., & Knutelska, M. (2004). Fluoxetine therapy in depersonalisation disorder: Randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry, 185, 31–36. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.185.1.31.
Somer, E., Amos-Williams, T., & Stein, D. J. (2013). Evidence-based treatment for depersonalisation-derealisation disorder (DPRD). BMC Psychology. PubMed Central full text.
Wang, S., Zheng, S., Zhang, X., Ma, R., Feng, S., Song, M., Zhu, H., & Jia, H. (2024). The treatment of depersonalization-derealization disorder: A systematic review. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 25(1), 6–29. DOI: 10.1080/15299732.2023.2231920.
World Health Organization. (2024). Clinical descriptions and diagnostic requirements for ICD-11 mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders. Official ICD-11 CDDR.