ArticleThe British journal of clinical psychology2026
A feasibility study of two variants of a blended functional remediation programme for euthymic patients with bipolar I disorder.
Article in The British journal of clinical psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A feasibility study of two variants of a blended functional remediation programme for euthymic patients with bipolar I disorder.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBipolar disorder (BD) is associated with reduced psychosocial functioning, partly due to cognitive impairments. Functional remediation (FR), aimed at ameliorating daily functioning, is based on psychoeducation and strategies to cope with cognitive problems. Given the limited number of studies in patients with BD, more studies are needed to evaluate different FR programmes.
methodsA total of 29 euthymic patients with BD-I followed a 12-session FR programme consisting of both group and individual sessions, offered in two variants: one in-person and one online (video conferencing). Both variants were supported by E-health modules. Feasibility was the primary outcome, as measured with dropout rates and attendance, as well as questionnaires about patients' experiences with the programme. The secondary aim was to explore effects on psychosocial functioning.
resultsResults show an acceptable dropout rate. Attendance was good as 83% visited at least 10 sessions. Analyses of participants' experiences revealed gain of insight and implementation of learned strategies in daily life. Independently working with the E-health modules did not appear feasible. Exploratory analyses showed a significant improvement in psychosocial functioning for both variants. LIMITATIONS: The results of the effect analysis are preliminary, due to a small sample and lack of a control group.
conclusionsThis FR programme showed good feasibility for both the in-person and online variant. Online treatment has advantages as it can reach out to a larger group of participants. Effect analyses indicated reduction in psychosocial impairments in both variants. Larger controlled studies are needed to investigate the treatment effects of the current FR programme.
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.