Cited by 109Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Effectiveness of systemic family therapy versus treatment as usual for young people after self-harm: a pragmatic, phase 3, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Open access
Cottrell, David J, Wright-Hughes, Alexandra, Collinson, Michelle, Boston, Paula, Eisler, Ivan, Fortune, Sarah, Graham, Elizabeth H, Green, Jonathon +9 more·2018·The Lancet Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Self-harm in adolescents is common and repetition occurs in a high proportion of these cases. Scarce evidence exists for effectiveness of interventions to reduce self-harm. METHODS: This pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial of family therapy versus treatment as usual was done at 40 UK Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) centres. We recruited young people aged 11-17 years who had self-harmed at least twice and presented to CAMHS after self-harm. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive manualised family therapy delivered by trained and supervised family therapists or treatment as usual by local CAMHS. Participants and therapists were aware of treatment allocation; researchers were masked. The primary outcome was hospital attendance for repetition of self-harm in the 18 months after group assignment. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN59793150. FINDINGS: Between Nov 23, 2009, and Dec 31, 2013, 3554 young people were screened and 832 eligible young people consented to participation and were randomly assigned to receive family therapy (n=415) or treatment as usual (n=417). Primary outcome data were available for 795 (96%) participants. Numbers of hospital attendances for repeat self-harm events were not significantly different between the groups (118 [28%] in the family therapy group vs 103 [25%] in the treatment as usual group; hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·87-1·49] p=0·33). Similar numbers of adverse events occurred in both groups (787 in the family therapy group vs 847 in the treatment as usual group). INTERPRETATION: For adolescents referred to CAMHS after self-harm, having self-harmed at least once before, our family therapy intervention conferred no benefits over treatment as usual in reducing subsequent hospital attendance for self-harm. Clinicians are therefore still unable to recommend a clear, evidence-based intervention to reduce repeated self-harm in adolescents. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

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/s2215-0366(18)30058-0

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • A study of family therapy versus usual treatment for adolescents who had harmed themselves showed no reduction in suicides with family therapy.

    “A study of family therapy as compared with usual treatment for adolescents who had harmed themselves showed no reduction in suicides with family therapy.72”

    From Suicide (2020) · cites this paper as [72]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [25]National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013 NICE London https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/chapter/foreword (accessed Feb 5, 2018). 27905712

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cottrell, D. J., Wright-Hughes, A., Collinson, M., Boston, P., Eisler, I., Fortune, S., Graham, E. H., Green, J., House, A. O., Kerfoot, M., Owens, D. W., Saloniki, E.-C., Simic, M., Lambert, F., Rothwell, J., Tubeuf, S., & Farrin, A. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • University of Kent (GB)
  • South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Cottrell, David J
Venue
The Lancet Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-03
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
203-216
ISSN
2215-0366 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2786348565
Cited by
109
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11
FWCI
17.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (07/33/01)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
self-harm, adolescents, family therapy, systemic family therapy, child and adolescent mental health services, hospital visits, repeat self-harm, usual care, adverse events, manualized intervention
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Family Therapy, Female, Humans, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Injurious Behavior, Treatment Outcome

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