Skip to main content
. 2022 Jul 11;31:e50. doi: 10.1017/S2045796022000300

Table 3.

Overall meta-analysis of outcomes

Employment rate
Comparison Follow-up (FU) subgroup N studiesa % employed at FUb Effect size of outcomec Heterogeneity
IPS Control ORd 95% CI p I2 95% CI p
n (%) N n (%) N
IPS vs. active control condition All studies 20 949 (50.1%) 1893 496 (26.7%) 1859 3.15 [S] 2.74–3.62 <0.01 79% 71–84% <0.01
⩽ 12 month FU 10 353 (38.3%) 921 182 (20.8%) 876 2.50 [S] 2.07–3.02 <0.01 68% 49–80% <0.01
> 12 month FU 15 895 (54.2%) 1652 518 (31.9%) 1625 2.88 [S] 2.48–3.36 <0.01 81% 72–87% <0.01
European studies (including UK) 7 345 (42.2%) 817 199 (25.5%) 781 2.27 [S] 1.84–2.79 <0.01 62% 32–79% <0.01
Non-European studies 13 604 (56.1%) 1076 297 (27.6%) 1077 4.09 [M] 3.40–4.92 <0.01 79% 68–86% <0.01
IPS vs. passive control condition All studies 12 846 (48.3%) 1753 525 (29.4%) 1788 2.26 [S] 1.97–2.68 <0.01 61% 43–74% <0.01
⩽ 12 month FU 7 144 (42.5%) 339 80 (23.6%) 338 2.12 [S] 1.52–2.96 <0.01 65% 37–81% <0.01
> 12 month FU 6 719 (50.8%) 1414 454 (31.3%) 1450 2.30 [S] 1.97–2.68 <0.01 55% 17–76% 0.05
European studies (including UK) 3 112 (30.3%) 370 78 (21.3%) 367 1.64 [S] 1.18–2.27 <0.01 34% 0–74% 0.22
Non-European studies 9 734 (53.1%) 1383 447 (31.5%) 1421 2.44 [S] 2.09–2.85 <0.01 62% 38–76% <0.01
Overall outcomes 31 1745 (48.8%) 3578 1013 (28.3%) 3578 2.62 [S] 2.37–2.89 <0.01 74% 67–80% <0.01
Test for subgroup differences Active vs passive control condition χ2 = 10.77; df = 1; p < 0.01
⩽ 12 month vs. > 12 month follow-up χ2 = 0.29; df = 1; p = 0.59
European vs. non-European studies χ2 = 10.54; df = 1; p < 0.01
Job duration
Comparison Follow-up subgroup M (s.d.) at FUb Effect size of outcomec Heterogeneity
IPS Control
N studiesa M (s.d.) N M (s.d.) N dd 95% CI p I2 95% CI p
IPS vs. active control condition All studies 17 24.5 (11.4) 1571 10.9 (10.0) 1565 0.47 [S] 0.33–0.61 <0.01 81% 73–87% <0.01
⩽ 12 month follow-up 7 27.1 (13.6) 674 15.2 (13.9) 666 0.42 [S] 0.16–0.68 <0.01 76% 51–88% <0.01
> 12 month follow-up 10 22.7 (9.9) 897 7.9 (5.1) 899 0.47 [S] 0.30–0.63 <0.01 82% 73–89% <0.01
European studies 7 21.0 (12.2) 688 10.2 (8.0) 694 0.40 [S] 0.20–0.61 <0.01 83% 68–91% <0.01
Non-European studies 10 27.8 (10.8) 832 12.4 (11.5) 828 0.52 [M] 0.33–0.71 <0.01 77% 62–86% <0.01
IPS vs. passive control condition All studies 7 27.1 (12.7) 1354 17.1 (13.7) 1393 0.31 [S] 0.12–0.49 <0.01 69% 42–83% <0.01
⩽ 12 month follow-up 4 26.4 (17.9) 155 18.0 (16.9) 152 0.23 [S] 0.07–0.40 <0.01 0% 0–78% 0.63
> 12 month follow-up 3 28.1 (1.9) 1199 16.0 (11.3) 1241 0.36 [S] 0.02–0.71 <0.05 87% 56–96% <0.01
European studies 1 29.6 (19) 127 27.7 (19.5) 121 −0.02 [N] −0.27 to 0.23 0.88 NA NA NA
Non-European studies 6 26.7 (13.9) 1227 15.4 (14.1) 1272 0.37 [S] 0.20–0.54 <0.01 54% 15–75% 0.06
Overall outcomes 23 25.2 (11.8) 2857 13.1 (11.4) 2889 0.41 [S] 0.30–0.52 <0.01 77% 69–83% <0.01
Test for subgroup differences Active vs passive control condition χ2 = 1.98; df = 1; p = 0.16
⩽ 12 month vs. > 12 month follow-up χ2 = 0.27; df = 1; p = 0.60
European vs. non-European studies χ2 = 0.65; df = 1; p = 0.42
Wages
Comparison Follow-up subgroup M (s.d.) at FUb Effect size of outcomec Heterogeneity
IPS Control
N studiesa M (s.d.) N M (s.d.) N dd 95% CI p I2 95% CI p
IPS vs. active control condition All studies 10 286.6 (314.7) 994 148.3 (196.6) 979 0.39 [S] 0.20–0.58 <0.01 76% 61–85% <0.01
⩽ 12 month follow-up 2 310.1 (328.5) 60 77.9 (94.6) 62 0.63 [M] 0.26–0.99 <0.01 0% NA 0.92
> 12 month follow-up 8 277.8 (332.2) 934 174.7 (223.0) 917 0.35 [S] 0.15–0.56 <0.01 80% 64–89% <0.01
European studies (including UK) 2 558.9 (491.9) 289 353.1 (247.2) 285 0.17 [N] −0.07 to 0.41 0.17 52% NA 0.15
Non-European studies 8 226.1 (266.3) 705 102.8 (166.9) 694 0.46 [S] 0.22–0.69 <0.01 77% 59–87% <0.01
IPS vs. passive control condition All studies 6 497.7 (413.9) 1222 414.8 (401.1) 1259 0.28 [S] 0.14–0.42 <0.01 23% 0–43% 0.26
⩽ 12 month follow-up 4 640.4 (451.7) 150 550.2 (427.3) 141 0.15 [N] –0.07 to 0.36 0.19 0% 0–79% 0.61
> 12 month follow-up 2 252.1 (252.4) 1072 144.1 (191.8) 1120 0.39 [S] 0.11–0.67 <0.01 64% NA 0.09
European studies (including UK) 0 X X X X X X X X X X
Non-European studies 6 497.7 (413.9) 1222 414.8 (401.1) 1261 0.28 [S] 0.14–0.42 <0.01 23% 0–43% 0.26
Overall outcomes 15 379.1 (358.9) 2148 257.0 (306.4) 2172 0.31 [S] 0.19–0.44 <0.01 65% 51–76% 0.01
Test for subgroup differences Active vs passive control condition χ2 = 0.84; df = 1; p = 0.36
⩽ 12 month vs. > 12 month follow-up χ2 = 0.14; df = 1; p = 0.70
European vs. non-European studies χ2 = 1.58; df = 1; p = 0.21
a

Some studies have used multiple follow-up assessments or have multiple treatment arms. Therefore, some studies are included in the analysis of both follow-up subgroups and one study compared IPS with both an active and passive control group. Therefore, the total amount of studies and sample sizes analysed in each comparison is sometimes lower than the sum of studies analysed in both follow-up subgroups.

b

Summary statistics for each of the three employment outcomes are assessed as follows: Employment rate: number and percentage of people in competitive employment at the follow-up assessment; Job duration: percentage of time within the study period that participants are employed; Wages: monthly salary in euros during the study period.

c

d > 0 and OR > 1 indicates outcomes are beneficial for IPS compared to the control group; d < 0 and OR < 1 indicates outcomes are beneficial for the control group compared to IPS.

d

Magnitude of effect (Chinn, 2000): Not clinically relevant [N]: d > −0.2 – <0.2; OR > 0.67 – <1.5; Small effect [S]: d ⩽ −0.20 and >−0.50 – ⩾0.20 and <0.50; OR ⩽ 0.67 and >0.29 – ⩾1.5 and <3.5; Medium effect [M]: d ⩽ −0.50 and >−0.80 – ⩾0.50 and <0.80; OR ⩽ 0.29 and >0.20 – ⩾3.5 and <5; Large effect [L]: d < −0.80 – >0.80; OR < 0.20 – >5.