The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assertive community treatment: an update of randomized trials
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Results of randomized clinical trials of assertive community treatment for seriously mentally ill patients published between 1990 and 1994 are reviewed to synthesize the state of knowledge about this research and to clarify continuing research directions. METHODS: Randomized trials of interventions that used treatment principles and practices consistent with the Program for Assertive Community Treatment model or close adaptations whose results were published since 1990 were identified by literature searches using MEDLINE and PsychLit and by contact with investigators of ongoing trials. RESULTS: Controlled clinical trials have been conducted with a wide range of severely mentally ill populations, including patients in Great Britain, patients with recent-onset schizophrenia, veterans, dually diagnosed clients, and homeless persons. Methodological improvements in some studies include increased attention to monitoring the experimental and comparison interventions, as well as larger sample sizes and longer duration of the clinical trials than in earlier efficacy trials. Strong positive effects of assertive community treatment on hospital days and on patient and family satisfaction were found. Gains in functional outcomes, such as employment, may require interventions specifically targeted to these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Questions about the role of assertive community treatment as time-limited treatment, as an adjunct to other services and treatment, or as a comprehensive and continuous service system for adults with severe mental illness require further research. The growing research base should provide valuable information on costs, outcomes, and indications for assertive community treatment that can be evaluated by policy-makers.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Stein, L. I. (1980) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1980.01780170034003 · Cited by 1,902
Cited by
The 2009 schizophrenia PORT psychosocial treatment recommendations and summary statements
Dixon, L. B., Dickerson, F., Bellack, A. S., Bennett, M., Dickinson, D., Goldberg, R. W., Lehman, A., Tenhula, W. N., Calmes, C., Pasillas, R. M., et al. (2010) · Schizophrenia Bulletin · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbp115 · Cited by 774
Statistical power and optimal design for multisite randomized trials.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Liu, X. (2000) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.5.2.199 · Cited by 593
Assertive community treatment for people with severe mental disorders
Marshall, M., & Lockwood, A. (1998) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001089 · Cited by 589
RetractedThe Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT): Updated Treatment Recommendations 2009
Kreyenbuhl, J., Buchanan, R. W., Dickerson, F. B., & Dixon, L. B. (2010) · Schizophrenia Bulletin · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbp130 · Cited by 499
Suicide within 12 months of contact with mental health services: national clinical survey
Appleby, L., Shaw, J., Amos, T., McDonnell, R., Harris, C., McCann, K., Kiernan, K., Davies, S., Bickley, H., & Parsons, R. (1999) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.318.7193.1235 · Cited by 469
Metadata
- Venue
- Psychiatric Services
- Published
- 1995-07
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 669-675
- ISSN
- 0022-1597 (ISSN-L)
- 1075-2730
- 1557-9700
- OpenAlex
- W1761627804
- Cited by
- 396
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 35.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Assertive community treatment: an update of randomized trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1176/ps.46.7.669
- The paper
- Assertive community treatment: an update of randomized trials. (1995). Psychiatric Services. https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.46.7.669
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.