Evidence·Field Application
Ukraine Field Application — 2022
Two weeks after the full-scale invasion, a free online programme began for Ukrainians experiencing war-related trauma. Over six months, approximately 7,000 people enrolled. Most were still inside Ukraine.
The work could not change the war or the displacement. It addressed the emotional reactions those events were producing. This record shows how the programme was delivered, which participants were measured and what changed in their reported symptoms.
Field application data. Not a controlled clinical trial. Not peer-reviewed. Results reflect participants who completed all six sessions of the measured program.
Field summary
Evidence type
Field application data across multiple online cohorts. Not a randomized controlled trial.
Population
Approximately 7,000 participants enrolled. Around 80% inside Ukraine during active hostilities; around 20% refugees abroad.
Delivery format
Six live online sessions per cohort over approximately four weeks. Six successive cohorts over six months. Delivered in Russian, free of charge.
Measurement
Structured 21-item PTSD symptom scale, maximum score 105. Measured before the program, at the end of the program, and at one-month follow-up where conducted.
Main outcome
Among completing participants in the publicly shown measured cohorts, PTSD symptom scores reduced by approximately 42–60% by the end of the program. Reductions sustained at one-month follow-up where measured.
7,000+
participants enrolled
6
cohort groups
42–60%
PTSD symptom reduction
20
clinicians joined delivery
Enrollment is total across all six cohorts. Reduction figures reflect completing participants in the publicly shown measured cohorts only.
What the scores show
21-item PTSD symptom scale, maximum score 105. Completing participants only, across the three publicly shown measured cohorts.
Before program
Pre-program scores ranged 53.1–69.2 across the three measured cohorts.
End of program
End-of-program scores ranged 21.5–39.8, representing 42–60% reduction among completing participants.
One-month follow-up
Where measured (Groups 4 and 5), follow-up scores were lower than end-of-program: 34.9 and 37.2.
Cohort outcomes
Across the three measured cohorts, end-of-program reductions ranged 42–60%. Where one-month follow-up was conducted, reductions were sustained or slightly improved.
21-item PTSD symptom scale, maximum score 105. Completing participants only.
Cohort
Group 3
Reduction
60%
Pre-program 53.1 → End 21.5
Follow-up: —
Cohort
Group 4
Reduction
42%
Pre-program 62.7 → End 36.4
Follow-up: 34.9 (44%)
Cohort
Group 5
Reduction
43%
Pre-program 69.2 → End 39.8
Follow-up: 37.2 (46.2%)
What was delivered
The program began in March 2022, two weeks after the full-scale invasion. It ran for six months across six successive cohort groups. Each cohort received six live online sessions over approximately four weeks, with recordings available between sessions and optional small-group mentoring from Ukrainian practitioners on the delivery team. Delivery was in Russian, free of charge, and funded through advertising.
Total enrollment was approximately 7,000 participants. Around 80% were inside Ukraine during active hostilities; around 20% were refugees abroad. The primary self-applied technique was taught in the first session and available for participants to use independently from that point. The programme was structured so that outcomes did not depend on ongoing access to a practitioner.
Approximately 30% of each cohort completed all six sessions. The publicly shown measurement data reflects this completing population — roughly 300–500 individuals across the three measured cohorts. Participants who did not complete all six sessions are not reflected in the reduction figures.
What changed
Among the measured completers, reported PTSD symptoms reduced; they did not disappear entirely. The reductions in the three published cohorts were 42–60%. The figures above show both the change and the symptoms that remained at the end of the programme.
In Groups 4 and 5, scores were lower again at the one-month follow-up: 34.9 against 36.4, and 37.2 against 39.8. The reduction had not immediately reversed when the structured programme ended. External conditions — active war, bombardment and displacement — had not improved. The symptom scores had.
Participants who went on to deliver the work
As the program progressed, twenty Ukrainian therapists, psychologists, and medical doctors who were participating in the sessions requested training in the Off-Switch Method and joined the delivery team.
They had not been recruited. They had experienced the method during active hostilities and wanted to use it with their own clients. Their decision to train and deliver the work is a different kind of evidence from a testimonial or an endorsement: it records what they went on to do.
“I have been working with trauma for many years and currently have a large number of refugee clients with whom many standard methods do not produce results. This approach works and brings real benefit.”— Trauma professional working with refugees, Ukraine program
What can be taken from this field record
This programme shows online delivery at scale under severe real-world conditions, with measured symptom reductions among completing participants. Where follow-up was conducted, those reductions held after the structured support ended.
It also records a practical response from clinicians: after using the method themselves, twenty trained and joined the delivery team.
It does not prove the method is universally effective. It does not prove superiority over other approaches. It does not replace controlled research. It shows what was observed in one structured field application.
What this record can and cannot establish
Field evidence, not a randomized or controlled clinical trial. Not peer-reviewed.
Participants self-selected into the program. There was no control group and no comparison condition.
The publicly shown reduction figures reflect completing participants — approximately 30% of each cohort's enrollment. Participants who did not complete all six sessions are not reflected in those figures.
Single field application. Results are not a guarantee of similar outcomes in other populations or contexts. Results vary across individuals and conditions.
Symptom measurement was self-reported using a structured 21-item scale, not a clinically administered instrument.
The method did not treat the war, the bombardment, the displacement, or any external event. External conditions remained what they were.
Not a substitute for medical or psychiatric care. Where clinical or psychiatric care is needed, it takes precedence.