ArticleEClinicalMedicine2020
Understanding young peoples' and family members' views of treatment for first episode psychosis in a randomised controlled trial (MAPS).
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The value of qualitative research in randomized controlled trials involving drugs and medical devices: a systematic mapping review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Pooled it
- Relative Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavior Therapy, Antipsychotics and the Combination for People with First Episode Psychosis: A Two-Study Pooled Analysis of Individual Participant Data.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2026Pooled it
- Cognitive behavioural therapy added to standard care for first-episode and recent-onset psychosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Cognitive behavioural therapy without medication for schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Antipsychotic medication versus psychological intervention versus a combination of both in adolescents with first-episode psychosis (MAPS): a multicentre, three-arm, randomised controlled pilot and feasibility study.The lancet. Psychiatry · 2020Trial
- Article
- Lived experiences of adolescents with anorexia nervosa and their parents during olanzapine treatment: a qualitative study.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Family members' experiences of seeking help for a young person with symptoms associated with the psychosis spectrum: A narrative review and synthesis.Clinical child psychology and psychiatry · 2024Review
- Article
- "Figuring out how to be normal": Exploring how young people and parents make sense of voice-hearing in the family context.Psychology and psychotherapy · 2022Article
- Clinicians' views of treatment types for first episode psychosis delivered in a randomised controlled trial (MAPS).EClinicalMedicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is limited evidence to inform treatment decision-making in adolescents experiencing first episode psychosis (FEP). In the MAPS trial (Managing Adolescent first Episode Psychosis: a feasibility Study), adolescents with FEP received either antipsychotic medication (AP), psychological intervention (PI), or both. We investigated treatment views of young people and family members across each treatment arm of MAPS.
methodsThirteen adolescents participating in MAPS and eighteen family members attended in-depth audio-recorded interviews to discuss trial treatments. Interviews were analysed using inductive Thematic Analysis, identifying salient themes across these accounts.
findingsFamily members in particular reported an urgent need for treatment regardless of type. Both AP and PI were broadly viewed as acceptable treatment approaches, but for differing reasons which participants weighed against a range of concerns. AP were often seen to reduce symptoms of psychosis, though participants expressed concerns about side effects. PI were viewed as interactive treatment approaches that helped improve understanding of psychosis and enhanced coping, although some found PI emotionally and cognitively challenging. Combining treatments was seen to maximise benefits, with a perceived interaction whereby AP facilitated engagement with PI.
interpretationAcceptability of and engagement with treatments for FEP may differ between individual young people and their family/carers. In order to be able to offer fully informed choices, and determine an optimum treatment approach for young people with FEP, definitive trial evidence should be established to determine wanted and unwanted treatment impacts.
fundingNIHR HTA programme (project number 15/31/04).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.