Unfinished business: Functional outcomes in a randomized controlled trial of a three‐year extension of early intervention versus regular care following two years of early intervention for psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether first-episode psychosis patients receiving extended early intervention had better functional outcomes than those in regular care and to examine the predictors of functional outcomes. METHODS: This is a randomized controlled single-blind trial of 220 patients randomized after 2 years of early intervention to receive early intervention or regular care for the subsequent 3 years. Outcomes included cumulative time in functional recovery during the 3-year trial assessed using the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS); and employment/education at last assessment which were, respectively, analyzed using multiple linear regression and logistic regression, accounting for well-known predictors. Linear mixed and generalized linear models were also used to examine the course of SOFAS and employment/education over the 3-year period. RESULTS: The extended early intervention and regular care groups did not differ on time in functional recovery (mean = 50.17 weeks, SD = 46.62 vs. mean = 46.18 weeks, SD = 51.54); percent employed/in school (60.4% vs. 68.8%) or change in SOFAS or employment/education status over time. SOFAS scores were stable between years 2 and 5. Individuals with longer periods of total symptom remission experienced significantly longer periods of functional recovery and were likelier to be employed/in school. Those who had completed high school were nine times likelier to be employed/studying. CONCLUSION: Most individuals maintained functional gains accrued from 2 years of early intervention with no further improvement whether in extended early intervention or regular care. There was a gap between symptomatic and functional recovery, and one-third were unemployed/not in school at year 5. The lack of additional progress even in extended early intervention suggests that specific interventions addressing functional roles need to be provided beyond the first 2 years of early intervention. Sustaining symptom remission and high-school completion may be additional avenues for targeting functional recovery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".