SynthesisBMC psychiatry2023
Relational continuity may give better clinical outcomes in patients with serious mental illness - a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Depression and its associated factors among adult women in Bangladesh during the July 2024 revolution.Discover mental health · 2026Article
- Chronic Disease Management Among People Treated for Comorbid Serious Mental Illness and/or Substance Use Disorders: A Population-Based Observational Study.Community mental health journal · 2026Article
- Insurance-Related Disparities in Mental Health Status and Care Among Low-Income U.S. Adults, 2019-2023.Community mental health journal · 2026Article
- Distress, Discomfort and Moral Injury: Emergency Department Clinicians Experiences Caring for People With a Psychosocial Disability and a National Disability Insurance Scheme Plan.International journal of mental health nursing · 2026Article
- Exploring the Role of App Features in Providing Continuity of Care to Users on a Digital Mental Health Platform (Wysa): Retrospective Mixed Methods Observational Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Observational
- Community-based care for patients with severe mental illness: A comparative study in Iran and selected countries.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Review
- Qualitative evaluation of a pilot mental health program for public safety personnel with post-traumatic stress disorder.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Unit managers between fluctuating demand and fixed staffing: a quantitative study in psychiatric nursing.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- 'It Is Like a Cross-Stitch … All Joined Together But Not Making a Very Nice Pattern': A Qualitative Study of Patient Perspectives on Physical Health Inequalities in Severe Mental Illness.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Building and sustaining therapeutic relationships across treatment settings: a qualitative study of how patients navigate the group dynamics of mental healthcare.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Wavering between life and death: a qualitative study into the perceived causes and needs of persons with persistent suicidality.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- An "ethics of strangers"? On knowing the patient in clinical ethics.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContinuity of care is considered important for results of treatment of serious mental illness (SMI). Yet, evidence of associations between relational continuity and different medical and social outcomes is sparse. Research approaches differ considerably regarding how to best assess continuity as well as which outcome to study. It has hitherto been difficult to evaluate the importance of relational continuity of care. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate treatment outcomes, including effects on resource use and costs associated with receiving higher relational continuity of care for patients with SMI.
methodsEleven databases were searched between January 2000 and February 2021 for studies investigating associations between some measure of relational continuity and health outcomes and costs. All eligible studies were assessed for study relevance and risk of bias by at least two independent reviewers. Only studies with acceptable risk of bias were included. Due to study heterogeneity the synthesis was made narratively, without meta-analysis. The certainty of the summarized result was assessed using GRADE. Study registration number in PROSPERO: CRD42020196518.
resultsWe identified 8 916 unique references and included 17 studies comprising around 300 000 patients in the review. The results were described with regard to seven outcomes. The results indicated that higher relational continuity of care for patients with serious mental illness may prevent premature deaths and suicide, may lower the number of emergency department (ED) visits and may contribute to a better quality of life compared to patients receiving lower levels of relational continuity of care. The certainty of the evidence was assessed as low or very low for all outcomes. The certainty of results for the outcomes hospitalization, costs, symptoms and functioning, and adherence to drug treatment was very low with the result that no reliable conclusions could be drawn in these areas.
conclusionsThe results of this systematic review indicate that having higher relational continuity of care may have beneficial effects for patients with severe mental illness, and no results have indicated the opposite relationship. There is a need for better studies using clear and distinctive measures of exposure for relational continuity of care.
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.