ArticleCommunity mental health journal2015
Clinical case management for patients with schizophrenia with high care needs.
Article in Community mental health journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Psychosocial interventions for people with both severe mental illness and substance misuse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to establish the effectiveness of a clinical case management (CM) programme compared to a standard treatment programme (STP) in patients with schizophrenia. Patients for the CM programme were consecutively selected among patients in the STP with schizophrenia who had poor functioning. Seventy-five patients were admitted to the CM programme and were matched to 75 patients in the STP. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at 1 year follow-up. At baseline, patients in the CM programme showed lower levels of clinical and psychosocial functioning and more care needs than patients in the STP. Both treatment programmes were effective in maintaining contact with services but the CM programme did not show advantages over the STP on outcomes. Differences between groups at baseline may be masking the effects of CM at one year follow-up. A longer follow-up may be required to evaluate the real CM practices effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24972907What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.