Cochrane · systematic review · CD008567
General physical health advice for people with serious mental illness
Tosh, G, Clifton, AV, Xia, J, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2014 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
18
current version
GRADE rated
7
No studies
9
Included studies
NR
No studies 9 · 50%Ungraded 2 · 11.1%Very low 2 · 11.1%Low 5 · 27.8%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Current version onlyPHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE versus STANDARD CARE for people with serious mental illness
Population: patients with people with serious mental illness
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Physicl health awareness ‐ not reported PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Physical health behaviour moderate or vigorous physical activity PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 80 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Quality of life Lehman Quality of Life Scale. Scale from: 1 to 7 PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 54 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adverse effects Death of participant PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | RR 0.98 [0.27, 3.56] | 2 studies · 487 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Economic ‐ not reported PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Leaving the study early PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | RR 1.11 [0.92, 1.35] | 6 studies · 964 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
HEALTH EDUCATION versus HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION for people with serious mental illness
Population: people with serious mental illness
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Physical health awareness ‐ not reported HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Physical health behaviour ‐ not measured HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of Life Lehaman Quality of Life Scale. Scale from: 1 to 7. HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 51 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse Effects HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | RR 0 [0, 0] | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Economic ‐ not reported HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Leaving the study early HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | RR 0.56 [0.26, 1.19] | 1 study · 78 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE versus AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE for people with serious mental illness
Population: patients with people with serious mental illness
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Physical health: Identification of disease state (Metabolic syndrome) HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | RR 1.25 [0.35, 4.49] | 1 study · 13 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Physical health behaviour ‐ not measured HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of life ‐ not measured HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse Effects ‐ not reported HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Economic ‐ not reported HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Leaving the study early HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | RR 0 [0, 0] | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE versus STANDARD CARE for people with serious mental illness
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Physical health awareness ‐ not reported PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Physical health behaviour ‐ not reported PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of Life Lehman Quality of Life Scale. Scale from: 1 to 7. PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 54 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adverse Effects Death of participant PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | RR 1.31 [0.3, 5.8] | 1 study · 407 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Economic ‐ not reported PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Leaving the study early PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | RR 1.18 [0.97, 1.43] | 5 studies · 884 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Service Use: Average percentage uptake of recommended health preventative services (US Preventative Services Task Force guidelines, high=good) PHYSICAL HEALTH ADVICE vs STANDARD CARE | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 363 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
HEALTH EDUCATION versus HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION for people with serious mental illness
Population: people with serious mental illness
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Physical health awareness ‐ not reported HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Physical health behaviour ‐ not measured HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of Life Lehaman Quality of Life Scale. Scale from: 1 to 7. HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 51 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse Effects HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | RR 0 [0, 0] | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Economic ‐ not reported HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Leaving the study early HEALTH EDUCATION vs HEALTH EMPOWERMENT EDUCATION | RR 0.56 [0.26, 1.19] | 1 study · 78 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE versus AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE for people with serious mental illness
Population: patients with people with serious mental illness
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Physical health: Identification of disease state (Metabolic syndrome) HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | RR 1.25 [0.35, 4.49] | 1 study · 13 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Physical health behaviour ‐ not measured HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of life ‐ not measured HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse Effects ‐ not reported HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Economic ‐ not reported HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Leaving the study early HEALTHY LIVING STUDY CIRCLE vs AESTHETIC STUDY CIRCLE | RR 0 [0, 0] | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |