ReviewBJPsych open2026
Reintegration programmes for people with severe mental illnesses released from correctional institutions: systematic review.
Review in BJPsych open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople with severe mental illness (SMI) face significant challenges when reintegrating from correctional facilities back to the community. These include increased recidivism risk, homelessness and mental health deterioration. Although specialised reintegration programmes were developed to address the needs of this vulnerable population, their effectiveness remains unclear owing to mixed findings reported in the literature.
aimsWe performed a systematic review to synthesise and evaluate available evidence on reintegration programmes designed specifically for people with SMI.
methodStudies were included if they focused on adults with SMI transitioning from correctional facilities to community settings. The search was conducted through 10 January 2026. Two reviewers independently screened eligible studies and scored the appropriate risk of bias tools under supervision. A narrative analysis was adopted given the heterogeneity of methodologies and outcomes.
resultsWe identified 26 eligible studies, of which 11 were longitudinal, seven were randomised controlled trials, 3 had an AB design, 2 quasi-experimental, 2 retrospective and 1 brief report. The median number of participants involved in these studies was 207 (range: 22-3086). Studies employed various interventions, including peer mentoring, critical time intervention models, case management and therapeutic community. Results showed mixed effectiveness: some programmes demonstrated reduced recidivism and improved mental health service engagement, whereas others had minimal impact or even counterintuitive increases in re-imprisonment. Programmes generally showed better outcomes with a longer duration and comprehensive aftercare components.
conclusionsReintegration programmes show promise, but current approaches demonstrate variable efficacy. Successful interventions appear to require comprehensive, sustained support addressing multiple domains including mental health treatment, housing, employment and social support.
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.