CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 887Schizophrenia research and treatmentCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness

. Psychological treatments in schizophrenia: I. meta-analysis of family intervention and cognitive behaviour therapy.

Open access
PILLING, S., BEBBINGTON, P., KUIPERS, E., GARETY, P., GEDDES, J., ORBACH, G., MORGAN, C.·2002·Psychological Medicine
DOI 10.1017/s0033291702005895
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background. While there is a growing body of evidence on the efficacy of psychological interventions for schizophrenia, this meta-analysis improves upon previous systematic and meta-analytical reviews by including a wider range of randomized controlled trials and providing comparisons against both standard care and other active interventions. Method. Literature searches identified randomized controlled trials of four types of psychological interventions: family intervention, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), social skills training and cognitive remediation. These were then subjected to meta-analysis on a variety of outcome measures. This paper presents results relating to the first two. Results. Family therapy, in particular single family therapy, had clear preventative effects on the outcomes of psychotic relapse and readmission, in addition to benefits in medication compliance. CBT produced higher rates of ‘important improvement’ in mental state and demonstrated positive effects on continuous measures of mental state at follow-up. CBT also seems to be associated with low drop-out rates. Conclusions. Family intervention should be offered to people with schizophrenia who are in contact with carers. CBT may be useful for those with treatment resistant symptoms. Both treatments, in particular CBT, should be further investigated in large trials across a variety of patients, in various settings. The factors mediating treatment success in these interventions should be researched.

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 · 10.1017/s0033291702005895

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • The findings are consistent with previous studies of acceptance and commitment therapy for psychosis.

    “These findings are consistent with previous studies of acceptance and commitment therapy for psychosis.”

    From Acceptance-based Behavior Therapy for Depression With Psychosis (2015) · cites this paper as [60]

    The study-selection and Cognitive behaviour therapy sections (pages not provided) describe CBT interventions and their outcomes, not acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). Searches for “acceptance and commitment therapy for psychosis” and “ACT acceptance commitment” found no passage about ACT studies, so our copy cannot verify the attributed comparison. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • A recent meta-analysis of mindfulness/acceptance interventions for psychosis showed these treatments are most effective for distress related to psychosis and negative or affective symptoms.

    “A recent meta-analysis of mindfulness/acceptance interventions for psychosis showed that these treatments are most effective for distress related to psychosis and negative or affective symptoms.60,61”

    From Acceptance-based Behavior Therapy for Depression With Psychosis (2015) · cites this paper as [60]

    The Abstract identifies this as a meta-analysis of family intervention and cognitive behavioural therapy, reporting effects on relapse, readmission and mental state. Searches for mindfulness/acceptance interventions and for distress, negative symptoms and affective symptoms found no passage assessing the claimed treatments or comparing which outcomes they treat most effectively. No page numbers were available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [2]2. Altman, D. G. & Bland, J. M. (1996). Detecting skewness from summary information. British Medical Journal 313, 200.
  2. [14]14. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. Academic Press : New York.
  3. [16]16. Cormac, I., Jones, C. & Campbell, C. (2002). Cognitive behaviour therapy for schizophrenia (Cochrane Review). In Cochrane Library, 1. Update Software : Oxford.
  4. [25]25. Falloon, I. R. H., Boyd, J. L., McGill, C. W., Razani, J., Moss, H. B. & Gilderman, A. M. (1982). Family management in the prevention of the exacerbation of schizophrenia : clinical outcome of a two- year longitudinal study. New England Journal of Medicine 306, 1437-1440.
  5. [26]26. Fowler, D., Garety, P. A. & Kuipers, L. (1995). Cognitive Behaviour Therapy for Psychosis. Wiley : Chichester.
  6. [32]32. Hedges, L. V. & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical Methods for Meta- analysis. Academic Press : London.
  7. [52]52. Mulrow, C. D. & Oxman, A. D. (eds.) (1997). Cochrane Col- laboration Handbook. In The Cochrane Library (database on disk and CDROM). The Cochrane Collaboration. Update Software, 1997 : Oxford.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
PILLING, S., BEBBINGTON, P., KUIPERS, E., GARETY, P., GEDDES, J., ORBACH, G., & MORGAN, C.
Affiliations
St Thomas' Hospital (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2002-07
Volume
32
Issue
5
Pages
763-782
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
DOI
10.1017/s0033291702005895
OpenAlex
W2160436994
Cited by
887
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 55
FWCI
8.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 45 d)
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family Caregiving in Mental Illness
Keywords
schizophrenia, family intervention, family therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, social skills training, cognitive remediation, psychotic relapse, hospital readmission, medication adherence, treatment discontinuation, caregivers, treatment-resistant symptoms
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Family Therapy, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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