Question · asked by 1 review
De‐escalation for aggression thought to be due to psychosis vs usual care: Global state: clinically important change in global state
- Population
- people who are aggressive secondary to serious mental illness
- Intervention
- De‐escalation for aggression thought to be due to psychosis
- Comparison
- usual care
- Outcome
- Global state: clinically important change in global state
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
De‐escalation for aggression thought to be due to psychosis vs standard care Clinically important changes in global state · people who are aggressive secondary to serious mental illness The review found no eligible studies for this question. De‐escalation techniques for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| De‐escalation techniques for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
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.