Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 615

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Lambeth Early Onset (LEO) Team: randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of specialised care for early psychosis

Open access
Craig, Tom K J, Garety, Philippa, Power, Paddy, Rahaman, Nikola, Colbert, Susannah, Fornells-Ambrojo, Miriam, Dunn, Graham·2004·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a service for early psychosis. DESIGN: Randomised controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Community mental health teams in one London borough. PARTICIPANTS: 144 people aged 16-40 years presenting to mental health services for the first or second time with non-organic, non-affective psychosis. INTERVENTIONS: Assertive outreach with evidence based biopsychosocial interventions (specialised care group) and standard care (control group) delivered by community mental health teams. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of relapse and readmission to hospital. RESULTS: Compared with patients in the standard care group, those in the specialised care group were less likely to relapse (odds ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.97), were readmitted fewer times (beta 0.39, 0.10 to 0.68), and were less likely to drop out of the study (odds ratio 0.35, 0.15 to 0.81). When rates were adjusted for sex, previous psychotic episode, and ethnicity, the difference in relapse was no longer significant (odds ratio 0.55, 0.24 to 1.26); only total number of readmissions (beta 0.36, 0.04 to 0.66) and dropout rates (beta 0.28, 0.12 to 0.73) remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Limited evidence shows that a team delivering specialised care for patients with early psychosis is superior to standard care for maintaining contact with professionals and for reducing readmissions to hospital. No firm conclusions can, however, be drawn owing to the modest sample size.

Overview

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 · 10.1136/bmj.38246.594873.7c

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 615

Metadata

Authors
Craig, T. K. J., Garety, P., Power, P., Rahaman, N., Colbert, S., Fornells-Ambrojo, M., & Dunn, G.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2004-10-14
Volume
329
Issue
7474
Pages
1067
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2111838308
Cited by
615
References
30
FWCI
14.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Lambeth Early Onset (LEO) Team: randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of specialised care for early psychosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.38246.594873.7c
The paper
Craig, T. K. J., Garety, P., Power, P., Rahaman, N., Colbert, S., Fornells-Ambrojo, M., & Dunn, G. (2004). The Lambeth Early Onset (LEO) Team: randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of specialised care for early psychosis. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38246.594873.7c

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.