Cited by 13Psychiatric care and mental health servicesSchizophrenia research and treatmentHomelessness and Social Issues

Assertive Community Treatment for Persons with Severe Mental Disorders: A Controlled Treatment Outcome Study

Hamernik, Elizabeth, Pakenham, Kenneth I.·1999·Behaviour Change

Abstract

The present study evaluated the efficacy of an Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) program for the seriously mentally ill. Outcomes of the program were assessed at baseline and 12-month follow-up and were compared with that of a control group, which received standard community care. Thirty-six subjects with serious mental disorders participated in the study. Dependent measures included number of hospital admissions and hospital bed days per year, life skills, quality of life, and psychiatric symptoms. Results of 2 x 2 (treatment/control group x baseline / 12-month follow-up) repeated measures ANOVAs indicated that, after 1 year, both treatments lead to a significant reduction in hospital admissions and bed days, and to improvement in life skills. ACT subjects evidenced a greater decrease in psychiatric symptoms compared to control group subjects. In general, markedly more ACT subjects showed reliable clinical change in life skills, quality of life, and psychiatric symptoms than control subjects. Although the ACT did produce greater clinical change than standard case management, it did not produce statistically greater improvement across most domains of functioning in the short term.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1375/bech.16.4.259

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Six of the studies that examined hospital readmission yielded improved hospital readmission rates.

    “In addition, only a minority of the studies reviewed herein (9/ 40) examined the extent to which the community-based program mitigated rates of hospital readmission, and six of these studies yielded improved hospital readmission rates (Hamernik and Pakenham 1999;Hugo et al. 2002;Lee et al. 2010;Australian Healthcare Associates 2012;Siskind et al. 2013;Dunt et al. 2017).”

    From Effect of community mental health care programs in Australia: A systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as Hamernik and Pakenham 1999

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 19 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hamernik, E., & Pakenham, K. I.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Pakenham, Kenneth I.
Venue
Behaviour Change
Published
1999-12-01
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
259-268
ISSN
  • 0813-4839 (ISSN-L)
  • 2049-7768
OpenAlex
W2110699549
Cited by
12
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Behaviour Change (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Homelessness and Social Issues
Keywords
assertive community treatment, severe mental illness, treatment efficacy, hospitalization, psychiatric symptoms, life skills, quality of life, community mental health services, case management, community-based care

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