Cited by 192Family Caregiving in Mental IllnessSchizophrenia research and treatmentCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics

Effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions for family carers of people with psychosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Sin, Jacqueline, Gillard, Steve, Spain, Debbie, Cornelius, Victoria, Chen, Tao, Henderson, Claire·2017·Clinical Psychology Review

Abstract

Psychoeducational interventions for family carers of people with psychosis are effective for improving compliance and preventing relapse. Whether carers benefit from these interventions has been little explored. This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of psychoeducation for improving carers' outcomes, and potential treatment moderators. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English or Chinese in eight databases. Carers' outcomes included wellbeing, quality of life, global morbidities, burden, and expressed emotion. Thirty-two RCTs were included, examining 2858 carers. Intervention duration ranged from 4 to 52weeks, and contact times ranged from 6 to 42hours. At post intervention, findings were equivocal for carers' wellbeing (SMD 0.103, 95% CI -0.186 to 0.392). Conversely, psychoeducation was superior in reducing carers' global morbidities (SMD -0.230, 95% CI -0.386 to -0.075), perceived burden (SMD -0.434, 95% CI -0.567 to -0.31), negative caregiving experiences (SMD -0.210, 95% CI -0.396 to -0.025) and expressed emotion (SMD -0.161, 95% CI -0.367 to -0.045). The lack of available data precluded meta-analysis of outcomes beyond short-term follow-up. Meta-regression revealed no significant associations between intervention modality, duration, or contact time and outcomes. Further research should focus on improving carers' outcomes in the longer-term and identifying factors to optimise intervention design.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2017.05.002

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 94 · Cited by 192

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Bandura, A. (1977a). Self-efficacy: Towards a unifying theory of behaviour change. Psychological Review, 84, 199-215.
  2. Bandura, A. (1988). Perceived self-efficacy: Exercise of control through self belief. Annual series of european research in behavioural therapy. Vol. 2. Annual series of european research in behavioural therapy (pp. 27-59).
  3. Clarkin, J. F., Glick, I. D., Haas, G. L., & Spencer, J. H. (Eds.), (1991). The effects of inpatient family intervention on treatment outcome. New York: American Psychiatric Press, Inc.
  4. Cucciare, M. A., & Weingardt, K. R. (Eds.), (2010). Using technologies to support evidence- based behavioural health practices -A clinician's guide. New York: Routledge.
  5. Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (Eds.), (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions v.5.1.0 (updated March 2011). Oxford: The Cochrane Collaboration.
  6. Li, F. M., & Xu, J. H. (2003). Comparative study on the effect of family intervetnion on schizophrenia patients in convalence and their family member. Health Psychology Journal, 11(2), 129-130.
  7. Liu, L., Gao, C. F., Yue, S. Y., Zhan, L. Y., & Liu, W. G. (2004). Effect of family intervention on rehabilitation of schizophrenic patients in community. Journal of Nursing Science, 3(19), 3-6.
  8. Merinder, L. B., Viuff, A. G., Laugesen, H., Clemmensen, K., Misfelt, S., & Espensen, B. (1998a). Effects of psychoeducative methods: A randomised controlled study. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 41, 144 (Supplement).
  9. Merinder, L. B., Viuff, A. G., Laugesen, H. D., Clemmensen, K., Misfelt, S., & Espensen, B. (1998b). Patient and relative education in community psychiatry: A randomised trial regarding its usefulness. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 9th Congress of the Association of European Psychiatrists, Denmark, Copenhagen.
  10. NICE (2010). Schizophrenia -The NICE guideline on core interventions in the treatment and management of schizophrenia in adults in primary and secondary care (Updated ed.). London: The British Psychological Society & The Royal College of Psychiatrists.
  11. Sin, J., Jordan, C., Barley, E., Henderson, C., & Norman, I. (2015). Psychoeducation for siblings of individuals with severe mental illness. Cochrane database of systematic reviews (publication no. 10.1002/14651858). (Art. no.: CD010540.Pub.2). · DOI
  12. Sin, J., & Norman, I. (2013). Psychoeducational interventions for families of individuals with schizophrenia: A mixed method systematic review. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 74(12), e1145-e1162.

Authors
Sin, J., Gillard, S., Spain, D., Cornelius, V., Chen, T., & Henderson, C.
Affiliations
  • St George's, University of London (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Sin, Jacqueline
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-08
Volume
56
Pages
13-24
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2619827223
Cited by
192
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 2
FWCI
2.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSTM Online Archive (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (acceptedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • St George's Online Research Archive (St George's University of London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (PDF-2015-08-035)
  • King's College London
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family Caregiving in Mental Illness
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Keywords
psychoeducation, family caregivers, psychosis, caregiver well-being, caregiver burden, expressed emotion, quality of life, relapse prevention, treatment moderators, intervention duration
MeSH terms
Family, Humans, Psychotherapy, Psychotic Disorders, Caregivers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review