ArticleThe British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science2025
Restricting community treatment orders to people with non-affective psychosis is needed to reduce use and improve subsequent outcomes: Queensland-wide cohort study.
Article in The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- 'Traumatic to Say the Least; It Still Affects Me': Consumer Perspectives on Community Treatment Orders in Australia.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Availability and restrictiveness of community treatment orders across 33 European countries.BJPsych open · 2026Article
- Understanding compulsory community treatment across Australian jurisdictions: insights from three different data sources.BJPsych open · 2026Article
- Factors influencing the outcomes of Community Treatment Orders: state-wide study using linked administrative health data from New South Wales, Australia.BJPsych open · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of community treatment orders (CTOs) has increased in many jurisdictions despite very limited evidence for their efficacy. In this context, it is important to investigate any differences in outcome by subgroup.
aimsTo investigate the variables associated with CTO placement and the impact of CTOs on admissions and bed-days over the following 12 months, including differences by diagnosis.
methodCases and controls from a complete jurisdiction, the state of Queensland, Australia, were analysed. Administrative health data were matched by age, sex and time of hospital discharge (index date) with two controls per case subject to a CTO. Multivariate analyses were used to examine factors associated with CTOs, as well as the impact on admissions and bed-days over the 12 months after CTO placement. Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12624000152527).
resultsWe identified 10 872 cases and 21 710 controls from January 2018 to December 2022 (total n = 32 582). CTO use was more likely in First Nations people (adjusted odds ratio = 1.14; 95% CI: 1.06-1.23), people from culturally diverse backgrounds (adjusted odds ratio = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.33-1.59) and those with a preferred language other than English (adjusted odds ratio = 1.21; 95% CI: 1.02-1.44). When all diagnostic groups were considered, there were no differences in subsequent admissions or bed-days between cases and controls. However, both re-admissions and bed-days were significantly reduced for CTO cases compared with controls in analyses restricted to non-affective psychoses (e.g. adjusted odds ratio = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.71-0.84 for re-admission).
conclusionsQueenslanders from culturally or linguistically diverse backgrounds and First Nations peoples are more likely to be placed on CTOs. Targeting CTO use to people with non-affective psychosis would both address rising CTO rates and mean that people placed on these orders derive possible benefit. This has implications for both clinical practice and policy.
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.