SynthesisEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2025
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of community treatment orders on aggression or criminal behaviour in people with a mental illness.
Synthesis in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Availability and restrictiveness of community treatment orders across 33 European countries.BJPsych open · 2026Article
- The contribution ofBJPsych open · 2025Article
- A Thirty-Year Forensic Case Report of Chronic Psychosis: Systemic Implications for Italian Forensic Psychiatry.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Community Treatment Orders in Australia in the Context of International Literature: A Narrative Review of Consumers, Families and Health Professionals' Perspectives.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Review
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of community treatment orders on aggression or criminal behaviour in people with a mental illness - CORRIGENDUM.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThere has been concern about violent acts and other criminal behaviour by people with a possible history of mental health problems. We therefore assessed the effects of community treatment orders (CTOs) on self-, third-party-, and agency-reported criminal behaviour when compared to voluntary treatment.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and criminal justice bibliographic databases for observational or randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CTO cases with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. Relevant outcomes were reports of violence and aggression or contacts with the criminal justice system such as arrests and court appearances.
resultsThirteen papers from 11 studies met inclusion criteria. Nine papers came from the United States and four from Australia. Two papers were of RCTs. Results for all outcomes were non-significant, the effect size declining as study design improved from non-randomised data on self-reported criminal behaviour, through third party criminal justice records and finally to RCTs. Similarly, there was no significant finding in the subgroup analysis of serious criminal behaviour.
conclusionsOn the limited available evidence, CTOs may not address aggression or criminal behaviour in people with mental illness. This is possibly because the risk of violence is increased by comorbid or nonclinical variables, which are beyond the scope of CTOs. These include substance use, a history of victimisation or maltreatment, and the wider environment. The management of risk should therefore focus on the whole person and their community through social and public health interventions, not solely legislative control.
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.