Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22374932›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2012

Group art therapy as an adjunctive treatment for people with schizophrenia: multicentre pragmatic randomised trial.

Mike J Crawford, Helen Killaspy, Thomas R E Barnes, Barbara Barrett, Sarah Byford, Katie Clayton, John Dinsmore, Siobhan Floyd, Angela Hoadley, Tony Johnson and 11 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
199.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 228 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. S3 guideline on psychosocial therapies in severe mental illness: evidence and recommendations.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2015
    Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.

Mike J CrawfordCentre for Mental Health, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, Claybrook Centre, London W6 8LN, UK. m.crawford@imperial.ac.uk
Helen Killaspy
Thomas R E Barnes
Barbara Barrett
Sarah Byford
Katie Clayton
John Dinsmore
Siobhan Floyd
Angela Hoadley
Tony Johnson
Eleftheria Kalaitzaki
Michael King
Baptiste Leurent
Anna Maratos
Francis A O'Neill
David P Osborn
Sue Patterson
Tony Soteriou
Peter Tyrer
Diane Waller
MATISSE project team
Imperial College London · GBUniversity College London · GBAvon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust · GBKing's College London · GBQueen's University Belfast · GBCamden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust · GBCentral and North West London NHS Foundation Trust · GBCentre for Mental Health · GBFramework · GBLifeArc · GBMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL · GB

Funding

Department of Health 04/39/04
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the clinical effectiveness of group art therapy for people with schizophrenia and to test whether any benefits exceed those of an active control treatment.

designThree arm, rater blinded, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial.

settingSecondary care services across 15 sites in the United Kingdom.

participants417 people aged 18 or over, who had a diagnosis of schizophrenia and provided written informed consent to take part in the study.

interventionsParticipants, stratified by site, were randomised to 12 months of weekly group art therapy plus standard care, 12 months of weekly activity groups plus standard care, or standard care alone. Art therapy and activity groups had up to eight members and lasted for 90 minutes. In art therapy, members were given access to a range of art materials and encouraged to use these to express themselves freely. Members of activity groups were offered various activities that did not involve use of art or craft materials and were encouraged to collectively select those they wanted to pursue.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcomes were global functioning, measured using the global assessment of functioning scale, and mental health symptoms, measured using the positive and negative syndrome scale, 24 months after randomisation. Main secondary outcomes were levels of group attendance, social functioning, and satisfaction with care at 12 and 24 months.

results417 participants were assigned to either art therapy (n=140), activity groups (n=140), or standard care alone (n=137). Primary outcomes between the three study arms did not differ. The adjusted mean difference between art therapy and standard care at 24 months on the global assessment of functioning scale was -0.9 (95% confidence interval -3.8 to 2.1), and on the positive and negative syndrome scale was 0.7 (-3.1 to 4.6). Secondary outcomes did not differ between those referred to art therapy or those referred to standard care at 12 or 24 months.

conclusionsReferring people with established schizophrenia to group art therapy as delivered in this trial did not improve global functioning, mental health, or other health related outcomes.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN46150447.

Indexed as

Psychotherapy, GroupAdultArt TherapyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient CompliancePatient SatisfactionSchizophreniaSingle-Blind MethodTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22374932
PMCPMC3289714
OpenAlexW2111605275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.