Table 1.
Characteristics of studies included in the review and meta-analysis
| Study | Participants N | Mean age (s.d.) | Intervention | Outcome measures | Main findings | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention group | Control group | ||||||
| Cognitive behavioural therapy | |||||||
| Addington et al. (2011) | 19 | 16 | 20.8 (4.5) | CBTp | GAF SAS SIAS SFS |
No sig. impact in function | |
| Bechdolf et al. (2007) | 29 | 38 | 25.2 (5.3) | CBTp | SAS | Sig. improvement in SAS however no sig. diff. between CBTp and control condition | |
| Fowler et al. (2009) | 33 | 38 | 27.8 (6.1) | SRT | Time use | No sig. impact on function in affective psychosis group Sig. improvement in function in non-affective psychosis group 25% of individuals with non-affective psychosis engaged in paid work in the year following end of SRT |
|
| Fowler et al. (2018) | 72 | 71 | 24.8 (8.3) | SRT | Time use | SRCBT→increase of 8.1 h in structured activity | |
| Ising et al. (2016) | 80 (UHR) | 90 | 22.7 (5.6) | CBTp | SOFAS | No sig. impact in function | |
| Jackson et al. (2007) | 31 | 31 | 22.5 (3.9) | CBTp | SOFAS | No sig. impact in function | |
| Morrison et al. (2004) | 97 (UHR) | 98 | 22.0 (4.5) | CBTp | GAF | No sig. impact in function | |
| Stain et al. (2016) | 17 (UHR) | 17 | 16.5 (3.2) | CBTp | GAF SOFAS |
No sig. impact in function | |
| Family-based intervention | |||||||
| Granö et al. (2016) | 28 (UHR) | 28 | 15.5 (1.6) | Family based intervention | GAF | Improvement in functioning | |
| Mcfarlane et al. (2015) | 147 (CHR) | 57 | 16.4 (3.3) | Family based intervention | GAF GFR GFS |
Improvement on GAF, work, and school participation | |
| Miklowitz et al. (2014) | 55 (CHR) | 47 | 17.4 (4.1) | Family based intervention | GAF | >19 years: >improvement in GAF if received family intervention 16–19 years: >improvement in GAF if received control condition |
|
| Supported employment | |||||||
| Killackey et al. (2008) | 20 | 21 | 21.3 (2.4) | IPS | Employment SOFAS |
IPS>sig. higher employment and reduced welfare benefits | |
| Killackey et al. (2019) | 66 | 60 | 20.4 (2.4) | IPS | Employment SOFAS |
IPS>sig. higher employment (71%) | |
| Rosenheck et al. (2017) | 144 | 83 | 23.2 (5.2) | SEE-supported employment and education | Participation in work or school | EI associated with > increase in participation in work or school and difference appeared to be mediated by SEE | |
| Cognitive remediation | |||||||
| Choi et al. (2016) | 30 (UHR) | 32 | 18.3 (3.7) | CRT-process speed training | SAS | Improvement in function | |
| Eack et al. (2009/2010) | 31 | 27 | 25.9 (6.3) | CRT-neurocognition + social skills group | SAS Major Role Inventory GAS |
Improvement in social functioning/maintained at 1 year follow-up | |
| Lee et al. (2013) | 18 | 18 | 22.8 (4.3) | CRT-neurocognition programme + psychoeducation | SFS | CR→improvement in function | |
| Loewy et al. (2016) | 50 | 33 | 17.8 (3.1) | CRT-auditory processing programme | GAF GFS GFR |
Improvement in function | |
| Østergaard Christensen et al. (2014) | 51 | 47 | 25.0 (3.3) | CRT-neurocognition programme | UPSA-B | No. sig. impact on function | |
| Piskulic et al. (2015) | 18 (CHR) | 14 | 19.7 (5.7) | CRT – auditory training | GFS GFR |
Sig. improvement in social function | |
| Ventura et al. (2017) | 38 | 40 | 21.5 (3.0) | CRT-neurocognition programme + group | SAS | Sig. improvement in social functioning | |
| Vidarsdottir et al. (2019) | 25 | 24 | 24.2 (3.2) | CRT-neurocognition programme + SCIT group | LSP-39 OSA Brief A |
No sig. impact on function | |
| Wykes et al. (2007) | 21 | 19 | 18.2 (2.5) | CRT – Neurocognition + TAU | SBS | Sig. impact on function | |
| Mendella et al. (2015) | 16 | 11 | 25.0 (3.9) | CCT-Compensatory cognitive training | UPSA-B | No sig. impact on function | |
| Multi-component psychosocial intervention | |||||||
| Albert et al. (2016) | 30 (CHR) | 29 | 26.6 (4.4) | Family treatment, social skills training, assertive treatment approach | SPS | No sig. impact on function | |
| Macneil et al. (2012) | 20 | 20 | 21.8 (2.1) | CBTp, family therapy, psychoeducation | GAF SOFAS |
Sig. improvement in functioning | |
| Palma et al. (2019) | 35 | 27 | 25.5 (4.8) | CBTp, psychoeducation, cognitive-motivational therapy | GAF | Sig. improvement in functioning | |
| Penn et al. (2011) | 22 | 22 | 23.5 (3.9) | CBTp, psychoeducation, motivational interviewing, social skills | RFS SSPA |
No sig. impact on function | |
| Ruggeri et al. (2015) | 239 | 153 | 29.3 (9.8) | CBTp, family, intervention, case management | GAF | Sig. improvement in functioning | |
| Schlosser et al. (2018) | 38 | 21 | 24.3 (2.6) | Mobile application- community peer support, CBTp, goal setting | MAP-SR RFS |
Trend towards sig. diff. on MAP-SR No sig. diff. on RFS |
|
| Wessels et al. (2015) | 31 (CHR) | 43 | 25.2 (5.4) | CBTp, psychoeducation, | GAF | Sig. improvement in function. | |
Brief-A, Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function; GAF, Global Assessment of Functioning Scale; GAS, Global Assessment Scale; GFR, Global Functioning: Role Scale; GFS, Global Functioning: Social Scale; LSP-39, Life Skills Profile; OSA, Occupational Self-Assessment; MAP-SR, Motivation and Pleasure-Self Report scale; RFS, Role Functioning Scale; SAS, Social Adjustment Scale; SBS, Social Behaviour Schedule; SFS, Social Functioning Scale; SIAS, Social Interaction Anxiety Scale; SOFAS, Social & Occupational Functioning Scale; SSPA, Social Skills Performance Assessment; UPSA-B, UCSD Performance-Based Skills Assessment.