Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 12;2019(12):CD001088. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001088.pub4

Comparison 10. Sensitivity analysis.

Outcome or subgroup title No. of studies No. of participants Statistical method Effect size
1 Motivational interviewing versus standard care: Leaving the study early: 1. Lost to evaluation short term (3‐6 months): Diagnostic criteria 8 506 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.03 [0.69, 1.54]
1.1 Mixed diagnoses (Schizophrenia, bipolar, & depressed patients ) 4 298 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.95 [0.61, 1.49]
1.2 Schizophrenia & other psychoses only 4 208 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.87 [0.18, 4.19]
2 Cognitive behavioural therapy + motivational interviewing versus standard care: Global state: 1. Average score (GAF, low = poor) at 12 months: Allocation concealment 4   Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) Subtotals only
2.1 Unclear risk of bias 2 144 Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) 1.63 [‐1.89, 5.14]
2.2 Low risk of bias 2 301 Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) 3.67 [‐6.79, 14.14]