The Journal of nervous and mental disease · 2025
Meta-analysis of Critical Time Intervention on Clinical and Psychosocial Outcomes.
СтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tsai Jack, Schrader Shannon W, Beydoun Hind A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This brief report describes a limited meta-analysis of controlled studies evaluating critical time intervention (CTI) on select clinical and psychosocial outcomes. Outcome data on 14 domains and 3 broad indices across 8 experimental and quasi-experimental studies were analyzed.
METHODS: Random-effect meta-analytic models with pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) were used.
RESULTS: Groups that received CTI had significantly better outcomes on quality of life (SMD = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.41, p = 0.01), homelessness (SMD = -0.20, 95% CI: -0.35, -0.04, p = 0.02), and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale Positive Symptom scores (SMD = -0.16, 95% CI: -0.28, -0.05, p = 0.01) than comparison groups at follow-up. CTI also had better outcomes on a created general health outcome index (SMD = -0.28, 95% CI: -0.59, 0.03, z = 1.79, p = 0.07).
CONCLUSIONS: CTI has small effect size impacts on several clinical and psychosocial outcomes. The lack of similar measures precluded meta-analysis of other outcomes, such as service engagement.
METHODS: Random-effect meta-analytic models with pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) were used.
RESULTS: Groups that received CTI had significantly better outcomes on quality of life (SMD = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.41, p = 0.01), homelessness (SMD = -0.20, 95% CI: -0.35, -0.04, p = 0.02), and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale Positive Symptom scores (SMD = -0.16, 95% CI: -0.28, -0.05, p = 0.01) than comparison groups at follow-up. CTI also had better outcomes on a created general health outcome index (SMD = -0.28, 95% CI: -0.59, 0.03, z = 1.79, p = 0.07).
CONCLUSIONS: CTI has small effect size impacts on several clinical and psychosocial outcomes. The lack of similar measures precluded meta-analysis of other outcomes, such as service engagement.