Cao 2014.
| Methods | Allocation: randomised Blinding: no information Location: inpatients, China Length of follow‐up: 2 years |
|
| Participants | Diagnosis: first‐episode schizophrenia (CCMD‐3) N = 80 Sex: 48 M, 32 F Age: 15 ‐ 50 years (mean ˜ 26.35 years, SD ˜ 12.8 years) Included: length of illness (mean ˜1.80 years, SD ˜ 1.20 years) Excluded: pregnancy, chronic physical disorder, brain organic disease, affective disorder, personality disorder, alcohol or drug abuse |
|
| Interventions | 1. CBT group*: N = 40 Content: The intervention included health education to help participants recognise and correct their wrong beliefs or cognition; behavioural therapy included relaxation training. Delivered by: not reported Frequency: The intervention was conducted during hospitalisations and once per month after discharge. Treatment duration: 2 years 2. Standard care group: N = 40 Content: antipsychotics and nursing care Delivered by: not reported Frequency: not reported Treatment duration: 2 years |
|
| Outcomes | Global state: relapse Quality of life: general, social, physical, psychological (GQOLI‐74 scores) Engagement with services: compliance with medication Unable to use: Insight: ITAQ (ranked ordinal data) |
|
| Notes | *Participants in CBT group also received the standard care intervention. | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote: "...randomly assigned..." (p.297). Comments: No details of the randomisation procedure were provided. Insufficient information to permit judgement of 'Low risk' or 'High risk'. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Comments: The study did not address the allocation concealment. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Comments: The study did not address the blindness, however, as the CBT was based on standard care, participants and personnel were not likely to be blinded. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Comments: The study did not address the blindness of outcome assessor. |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Comments: no attrition |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Comments: All measured outcomes were reported. |
| Other bias | Low risk | Comments: none obvious. This study is funded by the science and technology project of Jiang Men, Zhejiang Province. |