Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37777545›Full record

ReviewSchizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)2023

Satisfaction with cognitive remediation therapy: its effects on implementation and outcomes using the cognitive remediation satisfaction scale.

Joanne Evans, Rose Tinch-Taylor, Emese Csipke, Matteo Cella, Andrew Pickles, Paul McCrone, Dominic Stringer, Abigail Oliver, Clare Reeder, Max Birchwood and 12 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

22 authors.

Joanne Evans *Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3738-9366
Rose Tinch-Taylor *Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Emese CsipkeInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Matteo CellaInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Andrew PicklesInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Paul McCroneSchool of Health Sciences, University of Greenwich, London, UK.
Dominic StringerInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Abigail OliverUCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK.
Clare ReederInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Max BirchwoodWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
David FowlerSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Kathryn GreenwoodSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Sonia JohnsonFaculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Jesus PerezCambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Rosa RitunnanoWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Andrew ThompsonWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Rachel UpthegroveSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jon WilsonNorfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK.
Alex KennyPatient Advisory Board, King's College London, London, UK.
Iris IsokPatient Advisory Board, King's College London, London, UK.
Eileen M JoyceUCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0469-2844
Til WykesInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK. til.wykes@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5881-8003

Funding

DH | NIHR | Programme Grants for Applied Research (NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research) RP-PG-0612-20002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive Remediation (CR) improves cognition and functioning but is implemented in a variety of ways (independent, group and one-to-one). There is no information on whether service users find these implementation methods acceptable or if their satisfaction influences CR outcomes. We used mixed participatory methods, including focus groups, to co-develop a CR satisfaction scale. This was refined using three psychometric criteria (Cronbach's alpha, item discrimination, test-retest agreement) to select items. Factor analysis explored potential substructures. The refined measure was used in structural equation joint modelling to evaluate whether satisfaction with CR is affected by implementation method and treatment engagement or influences recovery outcome, using data from a randomised controlled trial. Four themes (therapy hours, therapist, treatment effects, computer use) generated a 31-item Cognitive Remediation Satisfaction scale (CRS) that reduced to 18 Likert items, 2 binary and 2 open-ended questions following psychometric assessment. CRS had good internal consistency (Alpha = 0.814), test-retest reliability (r= 0.763), and concurrent validity using the Working Alliance Inventory (r = 0.56). A 2-factor solution divided items into therapy engagement and therapy effects. Satisfaction was not related to implementation method but was significantly associated with CR engagement. Therapy hours were significantly associated with recovery, but there was no direct effect of satisfaction on outcome. Although satisfaction is important to therapy engagement, it has no direct effect on outcome. CR therapy hours directly affect outcome irrespective of which implementation model is used, so measuring satisfaction early might help to identify those who are likely to disengage. The study has mixed methods design.

Identifiers

PMID37777545
PMCPMC10542804

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.