Notice bibliographique
Résumé
One common feature of psychotherapies and professional interventions for people with schizophrenia is to provide support. For example, in a consultation, there will often be time allocated to listening to patients' concerns, giving encouragement, or arranging help with day-to-day living. There is, however, no universally accepted definition of supportive therapy. We used a wide definition to include any intervention from a single person with the aim of maintaining current functioning or to assist with a person's preexisting abilities. This includes interventions that require a trained therapist, such as supportive psychotherapy, as well as other interventions that require no training, such as “befriending.” We did not include interventions that sought to educate, train, or change a person's way of coping. To assess the effects of supportive therapy for people with schizophrenia, primarily on the outcomes of relapse, hospitalization, important change in mental state, global functioning, engagement with services, and satisfaction with care. We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of trials (January 2004), supplemented by manual reference searching and contact with authors of relevant reviews or studies. All randomized trials involving people with schizophrenia comparing supportive therapy with any other treatment or standard care. We independently selected articles to be read fully from the abstracts, and, again working independently, selected articles for inclusion in the review, and extracted data for analysis. We resolved all disagreement by discussion. We could include 22 studies but data were limited. We found no significant differences in the primary outcomes when supportive therapy was compared with standard care. When, however, supportive therapy was the control intervention and was being compared with other psychological therapies, some differences were apparent—all favoring the other therapies (see table 1). More detailed findings are reported in the full version of this review.1 Comparison of Supportive Therapy With Other Therapies Note: CI, confidence interval. RR, relative risk. NNT, number needed to treat. CBT, cognitive behavioral therapy. Weighted mean difference. Standardized mean difference. Comparison of Supportive Therapy With Other Therapies Note: CI, confidence interval. RR, relative risk. NNT, number needed to treat. CBT, cognitive behavioral therapy. Weighted mean difference. Standardized mean difference. There is insufficient data to identify a difference in outcome between supportive therapy and standard care (4 randomized controlled trial [RCT], n = 354). For a variety of outcomes, including hospitalization, general mental state, and satisfaction with care, there is some indication of an advantage of other psychological therapies over supportive therapy. However, there were always few data, a lack of consistency on reporting of outcomes, and the potential of inclusion bias favoring the group not receiving supportive therapy. From this review, data do not support the conclusion that supportive therapy offers anything different to other forms of psychological intervention. In addition, there is currently no evidence that supportive therapy adds to standard care in terms of the outcomes we sought. It seems intuitive that support be given to people with schizophrenia. Whether this should be formalized into a therapy package remains in doubt. Further trials are indicated for this common approach. Researchers should consider using supportive therapy as the main treatment arm rather than a comparator and should ensure therapists have been specifically trained in a well-defined supportive therapy. Outcome measures could also address areas that have been relatively neglected to date, including adverse effects, social functioning, occupational status, quality of life, and economic outcomes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».