Comparison 2. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 1: CBT+ STANDARD CARE versus STANDARD CARE ALONE (NON‐BLIND OUTCOME ASSESSMENT).

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Global state: 1. Relapse ‐ long term	13		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
1.1 With non‐blind outcome assessment studies	13	1538	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.86 [0.74, 0.99]
1.2 Without non‐blinded outcome assessment studies	12	1394	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.89 [0.77, 1.04]
2 Mental state: 1. General ‐ clinically important change (no improvement) ‐ long term	5		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
2.1 With non‐blind outcome assessment studies	5	496	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.82 [0.65, 1.02]
2.2 Without non‐blind outcome assessment studies	4	436	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.83 [0.63, 1.08]