Johnston‐Australia 1998.

Methods	Allocation: randomised. Design: single centre. Duration: 12 months. Country: Sydney, Australia. Setting: Eastern Suburb Mental Health Service (ESMHS).
Participants	Diagnosis*: schizophrenia, bipolar disorder (diagnostic criteria not reported). N = 73. Setting: Eastern Suburb Mental Health Service (ESMHS). Age: 16 to 70 years, mean ˜ 42 years. Sex: 56% M (41M, 32F). History: at least 3 of: i. high relapse rate over previous 2 years, ii. poor compliance, iii. disturbing behaviour, iv. frequent changes of accommodation, v. poor budgeting skills, vi. low quality of life, vii. difficulty to manage in existing service. Resident of the ESMHS catchment area. No primary diagnosis of substance misuse, organic brain disorder, or intellectual disability.
Interventions	1. ICM**: Caseload: 1:8‐10. N = 37. 2. Non‐ICM: Caseload: 1:20‐40. N = 36.
Outcomes	Service use: average number of days in hospital per month, not remaining in contact with psychiatric services, admission to hospital. Death: all causes. Global state: leaving the study early, compliance with medication. Social functioning: accomodation status, number living in supported accomodation, employment, participants spending at least 1 day employed, participants on paid employment, number of participants having contact with police or legal system. Behaviour: number of participants having incident of self harm or harm to others. Costs: direct costs of all care. Unable to use ‐ Service use: number admitted to hospital (not reported), use of general practitioner (not listed as review outcome of interest). Global state: clinically significant improvement (as Life Skill Profile (LSP) improvement ≧ 18 points/12 months) (scale assessment completed by the therapist, not reported what measurement used). Social functioning: accomodation changes (not listed as review outcome of interest), LSP (assessment completed by the therapist). Costs: direct costs of psychiatric hospital care (no SD).
Notes	*Schizophrenia 89%. **Main difference between teams was in ratio of staff to participant. Both are multidisciplinary, co‐ordinate and provide a variety of services, have access to inpatient, rehabilitation, and 24‐hour crisis service.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomised. No further details.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No details
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Primary outcome: clinician/participant mediated ‐ rating ‐ Unclear. Secondary outcomes: most are clinician/participant mediated ‐ rating ‐ Unclear.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Blinding not reported.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Service use (hospitalisations), social functioning (accomodation status, employment, police and legal involvement), behaviour (self harm and harm to others): collected and reported by the case manager. Blinding not reported.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	YES ‐ Primary outcomes: average number of days in hospital per month, not remaining in contact with psychiatric services. Numbers and reasons for missing data clearly reported and balanced between groups. NO ‐ Secondary outcomes: imbalance in numbers for missing data across intervention groups.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All listed outcomes of interest are fully reported.
Other bias	Low risk	No details. No evidence of the presence of other bias.