SynthesisAdministration and policy in mental health2022
Trial-Based Economic Evaluations of Supported Employment for Adults with Severe Mental Illness: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Administration and policy in mental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Supported employment interventions with people who have severe mental illness: Systematic mixed-methods umbrella review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Economic analyses of supported employment programmes for people with mental health conditions: A systematic review.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2022Pooled it
- Structural barriers to implementing individual placement and support in Japanese disability policies and Labor systems.Public health reviews · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Independent Reviewer-Rated and Self-Rated Fidelity Scores in Individual Placement and Support Programs: Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys.Administration and policy in mental health · 2025Article
- Article
- Individual placement and support: History, current status, and future directions.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To identify, appraise, and summarize outcomes reported in trial-based economic evaluations of Individual Placement and Support programs for adults with severe mental illness. Six databases were searched, including Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane, Scopus, and EconLit. Inclusion criteria were trial-based, full economic evaluations comparing Individual Placement and Support programs to traditional vocational rehabilitation programs for adults 18 years and older with severe mental illness. Study quality was appraised using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. Of the 476 articles identified in the database search, seven were included in the review. Studies conducted across Europe (n = 4) and Japan (n = 1) suggested that Individual Placement and Support may be a cost-effective alternative to traditional vocational rehabilitation programs. Two studies conducted in the United States demonstrated that Individual Placement and Support led to better vocational outcomes, but at neutral or higher costs than traditional vocational rehabilitation, depending on the benefit measure used. Trial-based economic evaluations of supported employment for adults with severe mental illness are limited and heterogeneous. The interpretation of economic outcomes warrants consideration of factors that may impact cost-effectiveness, such as geographical location. Future studies should evaluate whether the benefits of IPS outweigh additional costs for patients and other stakeholders.
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.