INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT vs NON‐INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT: Social functioning 2. Employment status ‐ by medium term ‐ spent > 1 day employed
It is very uncertain whether intensive Case Management changes social functioning 2. Employment status ‐ by medium term ‐ spent > 1… compared with non‐Intensive Case Management (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Intensive Case Management vs non‐Intensive Case Management Social functioning 2. Employment status ‐ by medium term ‐ spent > 1 day employed · people with severe mental illness It is very uncertain whether intensive Case Management changes social functioning 2. Employment status ‐ by medium term ‐ spent > 1… compared with non‐Intensive Case Management (very low certainty). Intensive case management for severe mental illness (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.46 [0.45, 4.74] | 1 study · 73 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intensive case management for severe mental illness 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.