Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19160260›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009

Advance treatment directives for people with severe mental illness.

Leslie Anne Campbell, Steve R Kisely

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Supported decision-making interventions in mental healthcare: A systematic review of current evidence and implementation barriers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Crisis interventions for adults with borderline personality disorder.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Advance treatment directives for people with severe mental illness.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Psychiatric advance directives: challenges emerging from implementation and possible steps forward.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Leslie Anne CampbellHealth Outcomes Research Unit, Capital Health District Authority, Centre for Clinical Research, West Annexe, Mackenzie Building, 5790 University Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, B3H 2E2. leslie.campbell@cdha.nshealth.ca
Steve R Kisely

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn advance directive is a document specifying a person's preferences for treatment, should he or she lose capacity to make such decisions in the future. They have been used in end-of-life settings to direct care but should be well suited to the mental health setting.

objectivesTo examine the effects of advance treatment directives for people with severe mental illness. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (February 2008), the Cochrane Library (Issue 1 2008), BIOSIS (1985 to February 2008), CINAHL (1982 to February 2008), EMBASE (1980 to February 2008), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2008), PsycINFO (1872 to February 2008), as well as SCISEARCH and Google - Internet search engine (February 2008). We inspected relevant references and contacted first authors of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), involving adults with severe mental illness, comparing any form of advance directive with standard care for health service and clinical outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data independently. For homogenous dichotomous data we calculated fixed-effect relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) and their 95% confidence interval again using a fixed-effect model. MAIN

resultsWe were able to include two trials involving 321 people with severe mental illnesses. There was no significant difference in hospital admission (n=160, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 0.5 to 1.0), or number of psychiatric outpatient attendances between participants given advanced treatment directives or usual care. Similarly, no significant differences were found for compliance with treatment, self harm or number of arrests. Participants given advanced treatment directives needed less use of social workers time (n=160, 1 RCT, WMD -106.00 CI -156.2 to -55.8) than the usual care group, and violent acts were also lower in the advanced directives group (n=160, 1 RCT, RR 0.27 CI 0.1 to 0.9, NNT 8 CI 6 to 92). The number of people leaving the study early were not different between groups (n=321, 2 RCTs, RR 0.92 CI 0.6 to 1.6). AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere are too few data available to make definitive recommendations. More intensive forms of advance directive appear to show promise, but currently practice must be guided by evidence other than that derived from randomised trials. More trials are indicated to determine whether higher intensity interventions, such as joint crisis planning, have an effect on outcomes of clinical relevance.

Indexed as

Advance DirectivesAdultCommitment of Persons with Psychiatric DisordersHumansMental DisordersPatient AdmissionRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID19160260
PMCPMC4161493

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.