Cited by 217Disability Education and EmploymentSchizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and Patient Involvement

Predictors of employment for people with severe mental illness: results of an international six-centre randomised controlled trial

Open access
Catty, Jocelyn, Lissouba, Pascale, White, Sarah, Becker, Thomas, Drake, Robert E., Fioritti, Angelo, Knapp, Martin, Lauber, Christoph +6 more·2008·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: An international six-centre randomised controlled trial comparing individual placement and support (IPS) with usual vocational rehabilitation for people with serious mental illness found IPS to be more effective for all vocational outcomes. Aims: To determine which patients with severe mental illness do well in vocational services and which process and service factors are associated with better outcomes. Method: Patient characteristics and early process variables were tested as predictors of employment outcomes. Service characteristics were explored as predictors of the effectiveness of IPS. Results: Patients with previous work history, fewer met social needs and better relationships with their vocational workers were more likely to obtain employment and work for longer. Remission and swifter service uptake were associated with working more. Having an IPS service closer to the original IPS model was the only service characteristic associated with greater effectiveness. Conclusions: The IPS service was found to be more effective for all vocational outcomes. In addition, maintaining high IPS fidelity and targeting relational skills would be a valuable focus for all vocational interventions, leading to improved employment outcomes. Motivation to find work may be decreased by satisfaction with current life circumstances.

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.bp.107.041475

Cites

41 of 41 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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Bond G, Becker DR, Drake RE. A fidelity scale for the Individual Placement and Support model of supported employment. Rehabil Couns Bull 1997; 40: 265-84.
  2. Banks S, McHugo GJ, Williams VF, Drake RE, Shinn M. A prospective meta- analytic approach to the analysis of multi-site data. New Dir Eval 2002; 94: 45-59.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Catty, J., Lissouba, P., White, S., Becker, T., Drake, R. E., Fioritti, A., Knapp, M., Lauber, C., Rössler, W., Tomov, T., van Busschbach, J., Wiersma, D., Burns, T., & EQOLISE Group
Affiliations
  • University of London (GB)
  • St George's, University of London (GB)
  • Universität Ulm (DE)
  • Dartmouth Psychiatric Research Center (US)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
  • Psychiatrische Universitätsklinik Zürich (CH)
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • Warneford Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Burns, Tom
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2008-03
Volume
192
Issue
3
Pages
224-231
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2127566385
Cited by
217
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 18
FWCI
56.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry
Funders
European Commission
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
Keywords
severe mental illness, employment, Individual Placement and Support, vocational rehabilitation, predictors of employment, service attributes, social needs, remission, service uptake, work history, employee motivation, life satisfaction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Mental Disorders, Employment, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Prognosis, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Rehabilitation Centers, Rehabilitation, Vocational, Schizophrenia, Employment, Supported

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