Trial reportCommunity mental health journal2025
Case Study Analysis of a Decision Coaching Intervention for Young Adults with Early Psychosis.
Trial report in Community mental health journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04532034 (Facilitating Emerging Adults Engagement in Evidenced-Based Treatment for Early Psychosis Through Peer-Delivered Decision Support), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Facilitating Emerging Adults Engagement in Evidenced-Based Treatment for Early Psychosis Through Peer-Delivered Decision Support
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Young adults with early psychosis often disengage from essential early intervention services (i.e., Coordinated Specialty Care or CSC in the United States). While decision support interventions improve service engagement, their use in this population is underexplored. This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and potential impact of a decision coaching intervention for young adults with early psychosis in CSC services. Using a mixed-method, longitudinal, collective case study design, we assessed the intervention's impact on decision-making needs through the Decisional Conflict Scale and qualitative interviews. We also evaluated feasibility, fidelity, and acceptability through observations and feedback from interventionists and participants. Eight young adults from three CSC programs participated, showing variable engagement, with generally favorable fidelity and acceptability ratings. The Decisional Conflict Scale revealed mixed findings, while four themes from qualitative interviews emerged: Perspective and Information Seeking, Motivation and Prioritization, Empowerment and Confidence, and Critical Thinking and Evaluation. The findings suggest that training CSC providers-including peer specialists and clinicians-to deliver decision coaching with fidelity is feasible, well-received by young adults, and potentially impactful on decision-making. Replication in a larger controlled trial, addressing observed study limitations, is warranted. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04532034) on August 28, 2020, as Temple University Protocol Record 261047, Facilitating Engagement in Evidence-Based Treatment for Early Psychosis (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532034?term=NCT04532034&draw=2&rank=1).
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.