Skip to main content

Table 3 Effect youth-ACT on general functioning

From: The effect of youth assertive community treatment: a systematic PRISMA review

Reference Main results Follow-up (months) Assessment instruments Effect sizea & 95% CIb  
Adrian & Smith (2014) [46] Compared to baseline 50% of the adolescents treated with youth-ACT showed improvement in general functioning according to CGAS score at discharge. Adolescents with psychotic and mood disorders improved more that patients with neurotic disorders P-Tc CGAS Baseline compared with discharge CGAS-scores:
ACT combined with inpatient care:
Only ACT:
1.3 (1.0, 1.6)
1.5 (1.3, 1.7)
Baier et al. (2013) [6] Youth-ACT associated with significant improvement in social functioning measured with HoNOSCA (school attendance, and peer and family relations) P-Tc HoNOSCA HoNOSCA-scores:
Sum-score:
Peer relations:
Family relations:
School attendance:
1.3 (0.8, 1,8)
0.4 (0.0, 0.9)
0.5 (0.0, 1.0)
0.6 (0.1, 1.1)
Chai et al. (2012) [48] Significant improvement in clinician-rated levels of social functioning. Adolescents treated with youth-ACT showed increase in school attendance P-Tc CGAS
School attendance registration form
School attendance: 0.7 (0.4, 1.1)
Godley et al. (2015) [52] Small significant improvement in pro-social activities. No significant differences in school attendance and family problems 3, 6, 9, 12 GAIN Pro-social activities: 0.2 (−0.2, 0.4)
McFarlane et al. (2014) [40] Adolescents with psychotic symptoms treated with youth-ACT showed significantly higher GAF-outcomes, increased school attendance or work (21%) compared to those who received Community Care (7.0%) 6, 12, 24 GAF GAF-score: 0.3 (0.0, 0.5)
McGarvey et al. (2014) [41] Decrease in average number of days missing school
(5.3 to 2.6 days) or being expelled from school (0.2 to 0.01 days) compared to baseline
3, 6, 12 GAIN School attendance:
Decrease in days expelled from school:
0.7 (0.4, 1.1)
0.6 (0.3, 0.9)
Schley et al.
(2008) [42]
Youth-ACT decreased the frequency of violence and crime P-Tc Structured
self-developed questionnaire
Crime:
Violence:
0.6 (0.1, 1.2)
0.9 (0.3, 1.5)
Urben et al.
(2016) [43]
Adolescents treated with youth-ACT showed significant improvements
in HoNOSCA social-score which include the items family relations,
peer relations and school attendance.
3, 6, 9 HoNOSCA HoNOSCA
Sum score:
Social-score:
School attendance:
0.6 (0.0, 1.2)
0.8 (0.1, 1.2)
0.8 (0.2, 1.4)
  1. aEffect sizes were computed as Cohen’s d rounded to the first decimal place. Positive effect sizes represents improvement. Small (≥ 0.2–0.5); medium (> 0.5–0.8); large (> 0.8) [44]
  2. bCI = Confidence interval
  3. cP-T = Pre-Post measurement was conducted