Granholm 2005.

Methods	Allocation: randomised Blinding: assessor blind Location: treatment and residential settings, San Diego, America Length of follow‐up: 12 months after the end of treatment
Participants	Diagnosis: schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (DSM‐IV) N = 76 Sex: 56 M, 20 F Age: mean ˜ 54.5 years, SD ˜ 7 years Included: length of illness: mean ˜ 30.1 years, SD ˜ 11.3 years; age from 42 to 74 years old Excluded: disabling medical problems that would interfere with testing, absence of medical records to inform diagnosis, and diagnosis of dependence on substances other than nicotine or caffeine within the past 6 months
Interventions	1. CBT group*: N = 39 Content: The treatment manual included a participant workbook that contained homework forms. The CBT was developed specifically for patients with schizophrenia; the age‐relevant content modifications were added. To simplify learning and to help participants remember to use cognitive techniques in everyday life, mnemonic aids were provided; behavioural role‐playing exercises and problem‐solving skills. Delivered by: Psychologists or senior graduate students who had 2 years of clinical experience delivered CBT. Frequency: 24 weekly 2‐hour group psychotherapy sessions Treatment duration: 6 months 2. Standard care group: N = 37 Content: Participants continued in whatever ongoing care they were receiving including antipsychotics. Delivered by: not reported Frequency: nor reported Treatment duration: 6 months
Outcomes	Mental state: general, positive symptoms, negative symptoms (PANSS scores); depression (HAMD scores), insight (BCSI scores) Functioning: social (UPSA, ILSS scores) Satisfaction with treatment: leaving the study early Unable to use: Knowledge of specific skills and information (The Comprehensive Module Test) (not predefined outcome for this review) Medication dose (not predefined outcome for this review)
Notes	*Participants in the CBT group also received the standard care intervention.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "A stratified randomisation procedure was used to assign participants to treatments... sequential list of random numbers." (p.522) Comments: adequate randomisation
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Comments: The author did not state the information about allocation concealment.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "...the coordinator was the only staff person other than therapists with knowledge of group membership... The assessors were blind to treatment group." (p. 522) Comments: 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	Low risk	Quote: "The assessors were blind to treatment group and measures were taken to assure the blinding." (p.522) Comments: The outcome assessor could not foresee assignment.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Comments: Six participants from the CBT group and five participants from the control group left the study early, however, ITT analysis was used to deal with the missing data.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Comments: All measured outcomes were reported.
Other bias	Low risk	Comments: none obvious