Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33231881›Full record

Trial reportHealth services research2021

Socioeconomic status and the effectiveness of treatment for first-episode psychosis.

Daniel Bennett, Robert Rosenheck

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Synergistic pathways to psychosis: understanding developmental risk and resilience factors.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Daniel BennettUniversity of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0949-2297
Robert RosenheckYale School of Medicine, West Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4314-4592

Funding

Socioeconomic Heterogeneity in the Impact of Psychiatric Care: A Secondary Analysis of the RAISE-ETP Trial for Patients with First-Episode PsychosisR03MH125253 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI BENNETT, DANIEL MARK · 2021 to 2022
$165k
NIMH NIH HHS R03 MH125253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess whether patient socioeconomic status (SES) moderates the effectiveness of coordinated specialty care for first-episode psychosis and to investigate possible mechanisms. DATA SOURCES: A secondary analysis of data from the RAISE-ETP Trial, which was conducted from 2010-2014. STUDY

designRAISE-ETP was a cluster-randomized trial comparing a coordinated specialty care (CSC) intervention called NAVIGATE with usual community care. We constructed a patient SES index based on parental education, parental occupational prestige, and race/ethnicity. After identifying correlates of SES, we used OLS regression analysis to estimate treatment effects on the major study outcomes across quartiles of the index. We also examined whether correlates of SES including the duration of untreated psychosis (DUP), and participation in NAVIGATE might account for the observed difference in effectiveness of CSC by SES. PRINCIPAL

findingsThe trial sample had a similar SES distribution to the US population, and SES was positively correlated with all mental health outcomes and several potential moderators at baseline. CSC substantially improved the main trial outcomes compared to community care for patients in the highest SES quartile but had small and statistically insignificant benefits for the remaining 75% of patients. Intervention participation rates and several potential moderators did not explain this disparity.

conclusionsCSC may be more effective for high-SES patients with early psychosis than low-SES patients. Additional research is needed to understand why CSC is less effective for low-SES patients and to develop methods to increase effectiveness for this subgroup.

Indexed as

Social ClassContinuity of Patient CareHumansMaleMental Health ServicesQuality of Health CareSchizophreniaUnited StatesYoung Adulthealth status disparitiespsychotic disordersschizophreniasocial classsocioeconomic factors

Identifiers

PMID33231881
PMCPMC8143679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.