Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28396643›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2017

Do Family Interventions Improve Outcomes in Early Psychosis? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Melanie Claxton, Juliana Onwumere, Miriam Fornells-Ambrojo

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.8field-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

67 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 154 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Melanie ClaxtonDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London London, UK.
Juliana OnwumereDepartment of Psychology, King's College, London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience London, UK.
Miriam Fornells-AmbrojoDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London London, UK.
University College London · GBKing's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Family interventions for psychosis (FIp) are effective in reducing service user relapse and carer distress in people with schizophrenia-spectrum conditions. Several treatment and best practice guidelines recommend FIp for all people with schizophrenia. However, outcome findings in relation to early psychosis groups have been inconsistent. The current paper reports a systematic review and meta-analyses of articles that evaluated FIp in early psychosis with a clearly defined comparison group. A combination of electronic database searches (using PsychINFO, Medline, and CENTRAL), citation searches and hand searches of key journals and reviews was conducted. Peer-reviewed articles published in English from database inception to June 2016 were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP). Seventeen papers from 14 studies met inclusion criteria for review, the overall quality of which was moderate. Meta-analytic synthesis showed that FIp improved service user functioning and reduced the likelihood of relapse by the end of treatment. Psychotic symptoms were significantly reduced in the FIp group at follow up, but this was not evident at end of treatment. In terms of FIp target mechanisms, carers receiving FIp were more likely to shift from high to low expressed emotion and less likely to report patient focused criticism or engage in conflict communication than carers randomized to standard care. Carer burden and well-being were improved by the end of treatment but gains were not sustained at follow up. FIp had no impact on carer emotional over-involvement. The findings indicate that FIp is an effective intervention for early psychosis service users and their relatives. However, further research is required to establish which key therapeutic components of FIp are most effective for whom, in addition to understanding the mechanisms by which FIp might affect positive change.

Indexed as

caregiver burdenearly psychosisexpressed emotionfamily interventionmeta-analysisrelapseschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID28396643
PMCPMC5366348
OpenAlexW2597869938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.