Cited by 350Schizophrenia research and treatmentCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsPsychiatric care and mental health services

Effectiveness of a brief cognitive–behavioural therapy intervention in the treatment of schizophrenia

Open access
Turkington, Douglas, Kingdon, David, Turner, Trevor·2002·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Little evidence exists to indicate whether community psychiatric nurses can achieve the results reported by expert cognitive–behavioural therapists in patients with schizophrenia. Aims: To assess the effectiveness and safety of a brief cognitive- behavioural therapy (CBT) intervention in a representative community sample of patients with schizophrenia in secondary care settings. Method: A pragmatic randomised trial was performed involving 422 patients and carers to compare a brief CBT intervention against treatment as usual. Results: Patients who received CBT (n=257) improved in overall symptomatology (P=0.015; number needed to treat [NNT]= 13), insight (P<0.001; NNT=10) and depression (P=0.003;NNT=9) compared with the control group (n=165). Insight was clinically significantly improved (risk ratio =1.15,95% C1 1.01-1.31).There was no increase in suicidal ideation. Conclusions: Community psychiatric nurses can safely and effectively deliver a brief CBT intervention to patients with schizophrenia and their carers.

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 · 10.1192/bjp.180.6.523

Cites

24 of 24 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?

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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Turkington, D., Kingdon, D., & Turner, T.
Affiliations
  • Royal Victoria Infirmary (GB)
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • Homerton University Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Turkington, Douglas
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2002-06
Volume
180
Issue
06
Pages
523-527
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2159645373
Cited by
350
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 18
FWCI
13.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
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 › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
schizophrenia, community mental health nursing, nurse-led intervention, secondary care, symptom improvement, insight, depression, caregivers, suicidal ideation, treatment safety
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Algorithms, Community Mental Health Services, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Psychotherapy, Brief, Schizophrenia, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Chi-Square Distribution, 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