Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30341141›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Evaluating the effects of community treatment orders (CTOs) in England using the Mental Health Services Dataset (MHSDS): protocol for a national, population-based study.

Scott Weich, Craig Duncan, Kamaldeep Bhui, Alastair Canaway, David Crepaz-Keay, Patrick Keown, Jason Madan, Orla McBride, Graham Moon, Helen Parsons and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Ensuring compulsory treatment is used as a last resort: a narrative review of the knowledge about Community Treatment Orders.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors.

Scott WeichSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Craig DuncanDepartment of Geography, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK.
Kamaldeep BhuiCentre for Psychiatry, Barts and The London School of Medicine & Dentist, University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9205-2144
Alastair CanawayWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
David Crepaz-KeayMental Health Foundation, London, UK.
Patrick KeownInstitute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Jason MadanWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Orla McBrideSchool of Psychology, Ulster University, Londonderry, UK.
Graham MoonGeography and Environment, Ulster University, Southampton, UK.
Helen ParsonsWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Swaran SinghWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Liz TwiggDepartment of Geography, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK.

Funding

Department of Health HS&DR/14/52/40
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSupervised community treatment (SCT) for people with serious mental disorders has become accepted practice in many countries around the world. In England, SCT was adopted in 2008 in the form of community treatment orders (CTOs). CTOs have been used more than expected, with significant variations between people and places. There is conflicting evidence about the effectiveness of SCT; studies based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have suggested few positive impacts, while those employing observational designs have been more favourable. Robust population-based studies are needed, because of the ethical challenges of undertaking further RCTs and because variation across previous studies may reflect the effects of sociospatial context on SCT outcomes. We aim to examine spatial and temporal variation in the use, effectiveness and cost of CTOs in England through the analysis of routine administrative data. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Four years of data from the Mental Health Services Dataset (MHSDS) will be analysed using multilevel models. Models based on all patients eligible for CTOs will be used to explore variation in their use. A subset of CTO-eligible patients comprising a treatment group (CTO patients) and a matched control group (non-CTO patients) will be used to examine variation in the association between CTO use and study outcomes. Primary outcome will be total time in hospital. Secondary outcomes will include time to first readmission and mortality. Outputs from these models will be used to populate predictive models of healthcare resource use. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the National Health Service Data Access and Advisory Group and Warwick University. To ensure patient confidentiality and to meet data governance requirements, analyses will be carried out in a secure microdata laboratory using de-identified data. Study findings will be disseminated through academic channels and shared with mental health policy-makers and other stakeholders.

Indexed as

Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric DisordersCommunity Mental Health ServicesEnglandHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInvoluntary Treatment, PsychiatricMental DisordersMental Health ServicesResearch Designhealth policyquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID30341141
PMCPMC6196959

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.