Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

82 questions · 82 findings · 10 reviews · Headline outcomes only

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 17 · 20.7%GRADE not reported 6 · 7.3%Very low 17 · 20.7%Low 23 · 28%Moderate 17 · 20.7%High 2 · 2.4%

INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT vs NON‐INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT

Relapse · people with severe mental disorders

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Intensive case management for severe mental illness 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT vs NON‐INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT

Leaving the study early · people with severe mental disorders

Intensive Case Management may leads to lower global state: 1. Leaving the study early ‐ by long term compared with non‐Intensive Case Management (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intensive case management for severe mental illness 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.7 [0.52, 0.95]
7 studies · 1970 participants
Low

INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT vs NON‐INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT

Social functioning 2. Employment status ‐ by medium term ‐ spent > 1 day employed · people with severe mental disorders

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).

1 finding from 1 review

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

INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT vs NON‐INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT

Mental state: No clinically important improvement · people with severe mental disorders

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Intensive case management for severe mental illness 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT vs NON‐INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT

Service use: 1. Average number of days in hospital per month ‐ by about 24 months · people with severe mental disorders

1 finding from 1 review

Intensive case management for severe mental illness 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
21 studies · 2220 participants
Moderate

INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT vs NON‐INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT

Service use: 3b. Average number of admissions (skewed data ‐ sample size ≧ 200) ‐ by long term · people with severe mental disorders

1 finding from 1 review

Intensive case management for severe mental illness 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 678 participants
Moderate

INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT vs NON‐INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT

Adverse event: 1b. Death ‐ suicide ‐ by long term · people with severe mental disorders

Intensive Case Management showed no clear difference in adverse event: 1b. Death ‐ suicide ‐ by long term compared with non‐Intensive Case Management (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intensive case management for severe mental illness 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.88 [0.27, 2.84]
3 studies · 1152 participants
Low

Case management vs usual care

Institutionalised (number of participants admitted to residential or nursing homes) at 10 ‐ 12 months · people with dementia

Case management showed no clear difference in institutionalised (number of participants admitted to residential or… compared with usual care (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Case management approaches to home support for people with dementia 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.95 [0.83, 1.08]
9 studies · 5990 participants
Low

Case management vs usual care

Time to institutionalisation at 12 months · people with dementia

1 finding from 1 review

Case management approaches to home support for people with dementia 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 125 participants
Low

Case management vs usual care

Hospital admissions · people with dementia

Case management showed no clear difference in hospital admission (number of participants admitted) at 12 months compared with usual care (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Case management approaches to home support for people with dementia 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.87 [0.59, 1.3]
5 studies · 585 participants
Moderate

Case management vs usual care

Mortality (number of deaths) at 12 months · people with dementia

Case management showed no clear difference in mortality (number of deaths) at 12 months compared with usual care (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Case management approaches to home support for people with dementia 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1 [0.83, 1.2]
8 studies · 6112 participants
High

Case management vs usual care

Quality of life (participants) at 12 months · people with dementia

Case management showed no clear difference in quality of life (participants) at 12 months compared with usual care (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Case management approaches to home support for people with dementia 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
SMD 0.05
3 studies · 511 participants
High

Case management vs usual care

Carer burden, well‐being or quality of life · people with dementia

Case management probably leads to higher quality of life (carers) at 12 months compared with usual care (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Case management approaches to home support for people with dementia 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
SMD 0.21 [0.06, 0.37]
5 studies · 681 participants
Moderate

Case management vs usual care

Carer burden · people with dementia

Case management showed no clear difference in carer burden at 10 ‐ 12 months compared with usual care (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Case management approaches to home support for people with dementia 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
7 studies · 3772 participants
Low

Case management vs usual care

HF mortality · adults with heart failure

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Disease management interventions for heart failure 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Case management vs usual care

All‐cause mortality · adults with heart failure

Case management may leads to lower all‐cause mortality compared with usual care (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Disease management interventions for heart failure 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.78 [0.68, 0.9]
26 studies · 6903 participants
Low

Case management vs usual care

HF readmissions · adults with heart failure

Case management probably leads to lower HF readmissions compared with usual care (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Disease management interventions for heart failure 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.64 [0.53, 0.78]
12 studies · 2528 participants
Moderate

Case management vs usual care

Patient readmissions · adults with heart failure

Case management showed no clear difference in all‐cause readmissions compared with usual care (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Disease management interventions for heart failure 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.92 [0.83, 1.01]
14 studies · 4539 participants
Moderate

Case management vs usual care

Adverse effects · adults with heart failure

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Disease management interventions for heart failure 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Case management vs usual care

Quality of life (MLHFQ): from 0 to 105 · adults with heart failure

1 finding from 1 review

Disease management interventions for heart failure 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
8 studies · 1595 participants
Very low