Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29228919›Full record

Trial reportBMC psychiatry2017

How effective is the comprehensive approach to rehabilitation (CARe) methodology? A cluster randomized controlled trial.

Neis Bitter, Diana Roeg, Marcel van Assen, Chijs van Nieuwenhuizen, Jaap van Weeghel

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Shifting Mindsets: The Impact of a Patient Portal on Functioning and Recovery in a Mental Health Setting.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Contemporary approaches in mental health rehabilitation.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
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

5 authors.

Neis BitterDepartment of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tranzo Scientific Center for Care and Welfare, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000, LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands. n.a.bitter@tilburguniversity.edu.
Diana RoegDepartment of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tranzo Scientific Center for Care and Welfare, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000, LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Marcel van AssenDepartment of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Methodology and statistics, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000, LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Chijs van NieuwenhuizenDepartment of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tranzo Scientific Center for Care and Welfare, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000, LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Jaap van WeeghelDepartment of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tranzo Scientific Center for Care and Welfare, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000, LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe CARe methodology aims to improve the quality of life of people with severe mental illness by supporting them in realizing their goals, handling their vulnerability and improving the quality of their social environment. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of the CARe methodology for people with severe mental illness on their quality of life, personal recovery, participation, hope, empowerment, self-efficacy beliefs and unmet needs.

methodsA cluster Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) was conducted in 14 teams of three organizations for sheltered and supported housing in the Netherlands. Teams in the intervention group received training in the CARe methodology. Teams in the control group continued working according to care as usual. Questionnaires were filled out at baseline, after 10 months and after 20 months. A total of 263 clients participated in the study.

resultsQuality of life increased in both groups, however, no differences between the intervention and control group were found. Recovery and social functioning did not change over time. Regarding the secondary outcomes, the number of unmet needs decreased in both groups. All intervention teams received the complete training program. The model fidelity at T1 was 53.4% for the intervention group and 33.4% for the control group. At T2 this was 50.6% for the intervention group and 37.2% for the control group.

conclusionAll clients improved in quality of life. However we did not find significant differences between the clients of the both conditions on any outcome measure. Possible explanations of these results are: the difficulty to implement rehabilitation-supporting practice, the content of the methodology and the difficulty to improve the lives of a group of people with longstanding and severe impairments in a relatively short period. More research is needed on how to improve effects of rehabilitation trainings in practice and on outcome level.

trial registrationISRCTN77355880 , retrospectively registered (05/07/2013).

Indexed as

Self EfficacyCluster AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleMental DisordersMental Health ServicesNetherlandsOutcome Assessment, Health CareQuality of LifeSocial EnvironmentSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeRecoveryRehabilitationSevere mental illnessSheltered facilitiesStrengths

Identifiers

PMID29228919
PMCPMC5725818

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.