8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Efficacy and acceptability of psychosocial interventions in schizophrenia: systematic overview and quality appraisal of the meta-analytic evidence

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="d309564e356">Psychosocial interventions are recommended in schizophrenia and first-episode psychosis/early psychosis (EP). Nevertheless, literature is heterogeneous and often contradictory. We conducted an umbrella review of (network) meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychosocial interventions vs treatment as usual (TAU)/active interventions(ACTIVE)/MIXED controls. Primary outcome was total symptoms (TS); secondary outcomes were positive/negative/depressive symptoms (PS/NS/DS), cognition, functioning, relapse, hospitalization, quality of life (QoL), treatment discontinuation. Standardized mean difference (SMD)/odds ratio (OR)/risk ratio (RR) vs TAU/ACTIVE/MIXED were summarized at end-of-treatment (EoT)/follow-up (FU). Quality was rated as high/medium/low (AMSTAR-PLUS). Eighty-three meta-analyses were included (RCTs = 1246; n = 84,925). Against TAU, regarding TS, Early Intervention Services (EIS) were superior EoT/FU in EP (SMD = -0.32/-0.21), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in schizophrenia EoT/FU (SMD = -0.38/-0.19). Regarding secondary outcomes, in EP, EIS were superior for all outcomes EoT except cognition, and at FU for PS/NS/QoL, specific family interventions (FI-s) prevented relapse EoT; in schizophrenia, superiority emerged EoT for CBT for PS/NS/relapse/functioning/QoL; psychoeducation (EDU)/any FI for relapse; cognitive remediation therapy (CRT) for cognition/functioning; and hallucination-focused integrative treatment for PS. Against ACTIVE, in EP, mixed family interventions (FI-m) were superior at FU regarding TS (SMD = -0.61) and for functioning/relapse among secondary outcomes. In schizophrenia, regarding TS, mindfulness and social skills training (SST) were superior EoT, CBT at FU; regarding secondary outcomes superiority emerged at EoT for computerized cognitive drill-and-practice training for PS/DS, CRT for cognition/functioning, EDU for relapse, individual placement and support (IPS) for employment; and at FU CBT for PS/NS. Against MIXED, in schizophrenia, CRT/EDU were superior for TS EoT (d = -0.14/SMD = -0.33), CRT regarding secondary outcomes EoT for DS/social functioning, both EoT/FU for NS/cognition/global functioning; compensatory cognitive interventions for PS/functioning EoT/FU and NS EoT; CBT for PS at FU, and EDU/SST for relapse EoT. In conclusion, mental health services should consider prioritizing EIS/any FI in EP and CBT/CRT/any FI/IPS for schizophrenia, but other interventions may be helpful for specific outcomes. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references95

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

          Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews

              Background Our objective was to develop an instrument to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews, building upon previous tools, empirical evidence and expert consensus. Methods A 37-item assessment tool was formed by combining 1) the enhanced Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire (OQAQ), 2) a checklist created by Sacks, and 3) three additional items recently judged to be of methodological importance. This tool was applied to 99 paper-based and 52 electronic systematic reviews. Exploratory factor analysis was used to identify underlying components. The results were considered by methodological experts using a nominal group technique aimed at item reduction and design of an assessment tool with face and content validity. Results The factor analysis identified 11 components. From each component, one item was selected by the nominal group. The resulting instrument was judged to have face and content validity. Conclusion A measurement tool for the 'assessment of multiple systematic reviews' (AMSTAR) was developed. The tool consists of 11 items and has good face and content validity for measuring the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Additional studies are needed with a focus on the reproducibility and construct validity of AMSTAR, before strong recommendations can be made on its use.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Molecular Psychiatry
                Mol Psychiatry
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                1359-4184
                1476-5578
                January 2023
                August 23 2022
                January 2023
                : 28
                : 1
                : 354-368
                Article
                10.1038/s41380-022-01727-z
                35999275
                493de456-04ec-4797-9798-12dd2a1bae91
                © 2023

                https://www.springernature.com/gp/researchers/text-and-data-mining

                https://www.springernature.com/gp/researchers/text-and-data-mining

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article