Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Musicoterapia para pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastornos similares a la esquizofrenia

Esta versión no es la más reciente

ver la versión actual 29 mayo 2017
Contraer todo Desplegar todo

Referencias

References to studies included in this review

Ir a:

Ceccato 2009 {published data only}

Ceccate E. Music therapy in rehabilitation for people with schizophrenia. A multicenter, single blind, randomised controlled trial testing the effectiveness of the STAM protocol (Sound Training Attention and Memory) [Musicoterapia nella riabilitazione cognitiva del paziente schizofrenico. Studio multicentrico randomizzato e controllato in singolo cieco di applicazione del protocollo STAM (Sound Training Attention and Memory)]. Master's thesis2010.
Ceccate E, Caneva P, Lamonaca D. Music therapy and cognitive rehabilitation in schizophrenic patients. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy 2006;15(2):111‐20.
Ceccato E, Lamonaca D, Caneva PA, Gamba L, Poli R, Agrimi E. A multicentre study to test the effectiveness of the STAM (Sound Training Attention and Memory) protocol in the rehabilitation of patients with schizophrenia: a single blind, randomized control trial [Musicoterapia nella riabilitazione cognitiva del paziente schizofrenico. Studio multicentrico randomizzato controllatoin singolo cieco di applicazione del protocollo STAM (Sound Training Attention and Memory)]. Giornale Italiano di Psicopatologia 2009;15:395‐400.

He 2005 {published data only}

He F‐R, Liu R‐K, Ma L. Influence of musical therapy on serum PRL of patients with schizophrenia, type II [yin yue xin li zhi liao dui ‖xing jing shen fen lie huan zhe xue qing cui ru su shui ping de ying xiang]. Shandong Archives of Psychiatry 2005;18(2):78‐9. [CAJ]

Li 2007 {published data only}

Li Yu‐Mei, Ren Xiu, Li Chuan‐Ping, Li Zun‐Qing. The correct effect of language guided music therapy on patients with schizophrenia [yu yan you dao shi yin yue liao fa dui jing shen fen lie huan zhe de xin li jiao zhi xiao guo]. International Nurses Journal 2007;26(9):917‐8. [CHINESE: Academic Journals]

Talwar 2006 {published and unpublished data}

Crawford M. A pilot randomised controlled trial to examine the effects of individual music therapy among inpatients with schizophrenia and schizophrenia like illness. National Research Register2004; Vol. 2.
Gold C. Music therapy improves symptoms in adults hospitalised with schizophrenia. Evidence‐Based Mental Health 2007;10(3):77. [CINAHL: 2009752767; MEDLINE: 17652559]
Maratos A. A pilot randomised controlled trial to examine the effects of individual music therapy among inpatients with schizophrenia and schizophrenia‐like illnesses. Unpublished study protocol2004.
Maratos A, Crawford M. Composing ourselves: What role might music therapy have in promoting recovery from acute schizophrenia?. London West Mental Health R&D Consortium's 9th Annual Conference. 2004.
Talwar N, Crawford M, Maratos A. A single blind randomised controlled trial of music therapy in patients with schizophrenia and related psychoses. Thematic Conference of the World Psychiatric Association on "Treatments in Psychiatry: An Update"; 2004 Nov 10‐13; Florence, Italy. 2004.
Talwar N, Crawford MJ, Maratos A, Nur U, McDermott O, Procter S. Music therapy for in‐patients with schizophrenia: exploratory randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 2006;189:405‐9. [AMED: 92246; MEDLINE: 0; MEDLINE: 17077429]

Tang 1994 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}

Tang W, Yao X, Zheng Z. Rehabilitative effect of music therapy for residual schizophrenia: A one‐month randomised controlled trial in Shanghai. British Journal of Psychiatry 1994;165(suppl. 24):38‐44.

Ulrich 2007 {unpublished data only}

Ulrich G. De toegevoegde waarde van groepsmuziektherapie bij schizofrene patiënten: Een gerandomiseer onderzoek [The added value of group music therapy with schizophrenic patients: A randomised study]. Heerlen, NL: Open Universiteit, 2005.
Ulrich G. [A randomised study of music therapy for schizophrenia: Study protocol]. Unpublished manuscript2003.
Ulrich G, Houtmans T, Gold C. The additional therapeutic effect of group music therapy for schizophrenic patients: a randomized study. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 2007;116(5):362‐70. [MEDLINE: 0; MEDLINE: 17919155; PsycINFO]
Ulrich G, Houtmans T, Lechner L. [English Translation not available] [De toegevoegde waarde van groepsmuziektherapie bij schizofrene patiënten een gerandomiseerd onderzoek]. Dissertation submitted to Open Universiteit Nederland2005.

Wen 2005 {published data only}

Wen Sun‐Rong, Cao Guo‐Yuan, Zhou Hui‐Shuang. The effect of music therapy on the depressive position of patients with schizophrenia [yin yue zhi liao dui jing shen fen lie huan zhe de yi yu zhuang tai de ying xiang]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Rehabilitation 2005;9(8):195.

Yang 1998 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}

Yang W‐Y, Li Z, Weng Y‐Z, Zhang H‐Y, Ma B. Psychosocial rehabilitation effects of music therapy in chronic schizophrenia. Hong Kong Journal of Psychiatry 1998;8(1):38‐40.

References to studies excluded from this review

Ir a:

Adler 2005 {published data only}

Adler LE, Cawthra EM, Donovan KA, Harris JG, Nagamoto HT, Olincy A, Waldo MC. Imrpoved P50 auditory gating with ondansetron in medicated schizophrenia patients. American Journal of Psychiatry 2005;162(2):386‐8.

Apter 1978 {published data only}

Apter A, Sharir I, Tyano S, Wijsenbeek H. Movement therapy with psychotic adolescents. British Journal of Medical Psychology 1978;51:155‐9.

Arango 2003 {published data only}

Arango C, Summerfelt A, Buchanan RW. Olanzapine effects on auditory sensory gating in schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry 2003;160(11):2066‐8.

Barrowclough 2001 {published data only}

Barrowclough C, Haddock G, Tarrier N, Lewis SW, Moring J, O'Brien R, Schofield N, McGovern J. Randomized controlled trial of motivational interviewing, cognitive behavior therapy ,and family intervention for patients with comorbid schizophrenia and substance use disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry 2001;158(10):1706‐13.
Haddock G, Barrowclough C, Tarrier N, Moring J, O'Brien R, Schofield N, Quinn J, Palmer S, Davies L, Lowens I, Lewis S. Cognitive‐behavioural therapy and motivational intervention for schizophrenia and substance misuse. 18‐month outcomes of a randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 2003;183:418‐26.

Bean 1964 {published data only}

Bean KL, Moore JR. Music therapy from auditory ink blots. Journal of Music Therapy 1964;1:143‐7.

Bechdolf 2005 {published data only}

Bechdolf A. Psychological intervention for persons at risk of psychosis in the early initial prodromal state. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.2005.

Brotons 1987 {published data only}

Brotons M. The correlations between content of preferred music and psychiatric diagnosis of criminal offenders and effects of this music on observed behavior. Master's thesis. Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University, 1987.
Brotons M. The correlation between content of preferred music and psychiatric diagnosis of criminal offenders and effects of this music on observed behavior. Thesis1997. [MEDLINE: 3423420]

Cassity 1976 {published data only}

Cassity MD. The influence of a music therapy activity upon peer acceptance, group cohesiveness, and interpersonal relationships of adult psychiatric patients. Journal of Music Therapy 1976;13:66‐76.

Castilla‐Puentes 2002 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}

Castilla‐Puentes RC, Valero J, Vargas J, Gongora O, Pava C, Perel J. Music therapy and medication compliance in psychotic patients. 155th Annual Meeting of the American Psychiatri Association. 2002 May 18‐23; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

Ceccato 2006 {published data only}

Ceccato E, Caneva P, Lamonaca D. Music therapy and cognitive rehabilitation in schizophrenic patients. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy 2006;15(2):111‐20.
Ceccato E, Caneva P, Lamonaca D. Music therapy and cognitive rehabilitation: A pilot study. 6th European Music Therapy Congress. Jyväskylä, Finland, 2004.

Chambliss 1996 {published data only}

Chambliss C, Tyson K, Tracy J. Performance on the purdue pegboard and finger tapping by schizophrenics after mellow and frenetic antecedent music. Perceptual and Motor Skills 1996b;83(3):1161‐2.

Cook 1973 {published data only}

Cook M, Freethy M. The use of music as a positive reinforcer to eliminate complaining behavior. Journal of Music Therapy 1973;10:213‐6.

de l'Etoile 2002 {published data only}

de l'Etoile SK. The effectiveness of music therapy in group psychotherapy for adults with mental illness. Arts in Psychotherapy 2002;29(2):69‐78.

Drury 1996 {published data only}

Drury V. Cognitive therapy and recovery from acute psychosis: a randomised controlled trial. PhD dissertation submitted to the University of Birmingham1999.
Drury V, Birchwood M, Cochrane R, MacMillan F. Cognitive therapy and recovery from acute psychosis‐a controlled trial. I. Impact on psychotic symptoms. British Journal of Psychiatry 1996;169:593‐601.
Drury V, Birchwood M, Cochrane R, MacMillan F. Cognitive therapy and recovery from acute psychosis‐a controlled trial. II. Impact on recovery time. British Journal of Psychiatry 1996;169:602‐7.
Drury V, Brichwood M, Cochrane R. Cognitive therapy and recovery from acute psychosis: a controlled trial. 3. Five‐year follow‐up. British Journal of Psychiatry 2000;177:8‐14.

Gaszner 2009 {published data only}

Gaszner P. Complex therapy of schizophrenia [A szkizofrenia komplex terapiaja]. Neuropsychopharmacologia Hungarica 2009;11(1):41‐5.

Glicksohn 2000 {published data only}

Glicksohn J, Cohen Y. Can music alleviate cognitive dysfunction in schizophrenia?. Psychopathology 2000;33:43‐7.

Green 1987 {published data only}

Green BL, Wehling C, Talsky GJ. Group art therapy as an adjunct to treatment for chronic outpatients. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1987;38(9):988‐91.

Grocke 2009a {published data only}

Grocke D. The effect of group music therapy on quality of life for participants living with a severe and enduring mental illness. Journal of Music Therapy 2009;XLVI(2):90‐104.

Hannes 1974 {published data only}

Hannes M, Siegel HD. The short term effect of socializing on performance of schizophrenics in recreational therapy. Journal of Community Psychology 1974;2(1):51‐3. [CN‐00239038]

Hayashi 2002 {published data only}

Hayashi N, Tanabe Y, Nakagawa S, Noguchi M, Iwata C, Koubuchi Y, Watanabe M, Okui M, Takagi K, Sugita K, Horiuchi K, Sasaki A, Koike I. Effects of group musical therapy on inpatients with chronic psychoses: A controlled study. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 2002;56(2):187‐93.

Hodgson 1996 {published data only}

Hodgson NS. The effects of music therapy on the attendance rate and number of verbal prompts given to elicit attendance of adult psychiatric clients in a day treatment center. Master's thesis. Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University, 1996.

Hogarty 1988 {published data only}

Hogarty GE, McEvoy JP, Munetz M, DiBarry AL, Cather R, Cooley SJ, Ulrich RF, Cater M, Madonia MJ. Dose of fluphenazine, familial expressed emotion, and outcome in schizophrenia.Results of a two‐year controlled study.. Archives of General Psychiatry. 1988;45(9):797‐805.

Hu 2004 {published data only}

Hu QL, Xue LH, Gao XH. Effect of music‐sport therapy on the insight and behavioral disturbance in patients with schizophrenia [chang gui ying yong yin yue ji ti yu liao fa gai shan jing shen fen lie zheng huan zhe zi zhi li he xing wei zhang ai de zuo yong]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Rehabilitation [Zhongguo lin chuang kang fu] 2004;8(9):1626‐7. [EMBASE: 2004336037]

Hustig 1990 {published data only}

Hustig HH, Tran DB, Hafner RJ, Miller RJ. The effect of headphone music on persistent auditory hallucinations. Behavioural Psychotherapy 1990;18:273‐81.

Johnston 2002 {published data only}

Johnston O, Gallagher AG, MsMahon PJ, King DJ. The efficacy of using a personal stereo to treat auditory hallucinations: Preliminary findings. Behavior Modification 2002;26(4):537‐49.

Kallert 2004 {published data only}

Kallert TW, Matthes C, Glöckner M, Eichler T, Koch R, Schützwohl M. Acute psychiatric day hospital treatment:is the effectiveness of this treatment approach still questionable? [Akutpsychiatrische tagesklinische Behandlung: Ein effektivitätsgesichertes Versorgungsangebot?]. Psychiatrische Praxis 2004;31(8):409‐19.

Kong 2007 {published data only}

Kong YL. The effects of music therapy on patients with chronic schizophrenia [yin yue zhi liao dui man xing jing shen fen lie huan zhe de kang fu xiao guo de yan jiu]. Shandong Archives of Psychiatry 2007;20(4):225‐6. [CHINESE: Academic Journals]

Krajewski 1993 {published data only}

Krajewski C, Classen W, Boesken S. Comparison of art and cognitive therapy (IPT) with simultaneous cognitive and art therapy for schizophrenic patients regarding the change of cognitive processes.. Pharmacopsychiatry 1993;26:171.

Leung 1998 {published data only}

Leung CM, Lee G, Cheung B, Kwong E, Wing YK, Kan CS, Lau J. Karaoke therapy in the rehabilitation of mental patients. Singapore Medical Journal 1998;39(4):166‐8.
Ng WF. Karaoke therapy in the rehabilitation of mental patients (SMJ vol 43 issue 12 December 2002). Singapore Medical Journal 2002;43(12):643; author reply 643‐4.

Li 2005 {published data only}

Li M, Wang H, Li Z. Effect of music and sport therapy as assistant treatment for schizophrenia [yin yue ti yu liao fa dui man xing jing shen fen lie zheng de fu zhu zhi liao xiao guo]. Heilongjiang Nursing Journal 2005;11(20):1677‐8. [CAJ]

Lin 2003 {published data only}

Xiao LL. The effect of music therapy on the recovery stage of different types of psychotic patients [yin yue zhi liao dui hui fu qi bu tong lei xing jing shen bing huan zhe liao xiao de yan jiu]. Journal of the Gannan Medical College 2003;23(2):183‐4.

Margo 1981 {published data only}

Margo A, Hemsley DR, Slade PD. The effects of varying auditory input on schizophrenic hallucinations. British Journal of Psychiatry 1981;139:122‐7.

Martinez 2005 {published data only}

Martinez LRD, Soto HO, Guerrero CL, Verdugo SR, Gasca LR, Collazos MV, Lopez MLG, Gomez EM, Sanchez AS. A comprehensive rehabilitation for people with schizophrenia in Mexico: The model of the national psychiatry institute Ramón de la Fuente, group III [La rehabilitación integral del paciente esquizofrénico en México: El modelo del instituto nacional de psquiatria Ramón de la Fuente, grupo III]. Salud Mental 2005;28(6):9‐19.

McInnis 1990 {published data only}

McInnis M, Marks I. Audiotape therapy for persistent auditory hallucinations. British Journal of Psychiatry 1990;157:913‐4.

Meschede 1983 {published data only}

Meschede HG, Bender W, Pfeiffer H. Music therapy with psychiatric problem patients [Musiktherapie mit psychiatrischen Problempatienten]. Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik, Medizinische Psychologie 1983;33(3):101‐6.

Metzner 2010 {published data only}

Metzner S. About being meant: Music therapy with an in‐patient suffering from psychosis. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy 2010;19(2):133‐50.

Moe 2000 {published data only}

Moe T, Roesen A, Raben H. Restitutional factors in group music therapy with psychiatric patients based on a modification of guided imagery and music (GIM). Nordic Journal of Music Therapy 2000;9(2):36‐50.

Murow 1997 {published data only}

Murow E, Unikel C. Music therapy and body expression therapy in the rehabilitation of patients with chronic schizophrenia [La musicoterapia y la terapia de expresión corporal en la rehabilitación del paciente con esquizofrenia crónica]. Salud Mental 1997;20(3):35‐40.

Na 2009 {published data only}

Na HJ, Yang S. Effects of listening to music on auditory hallucination and psychiatric symptoms in people with schizophrenia. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing 2009;39(1):62‐71.

Nelson 1991 {published data only}

Nelson HE, Thrasher S, Barnes TRE. Practical ways of alleviating auditory hallucinations. BMJ 1991;302(6772):327.

Ni 2002 {published data only}

Ni JZ, Liu YR. Analysis of music therapy effect on patient with chronic schizophrenia [yin yue liao fa zhi liao jing shen fen lie zheng liao xiao fen xi]. Health Psychology Journal 2002;10(2):145‐6. [CBM: (Chinese Biomedical Literature); CAJ]

Olbrich 1990 {published data only}

Olbrich R, Mussgay L. Reduction of schizophrenic deficits by cognitive training: an evaluative study. European Archives of Psychiatry & Neurological Sciences 1990;239(6):366‐9. [MEDLINE: Medline 90367727; CN‐00069945]

Pavlicevic 1994 {published data only}

Pavlicevic M, Trevarthen C, Duncan J. Improvisational music therapy and the rehabilitation of persons suffering from chronic schizophrenia. Journal of Music Therapy 1994;31(2):88‐104.

Pfeiffer 1987 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}

Pfeiffer H, Wunderlich S, Bender W, Elz U, Horn B. Music improvisation with schizophrenic patients ‐ a controlled study in the assessment of therapeutic effects [Freie Musikimprovisation mit schizophrenen Patienten ‐ kontrollierte Studie zur Untersuchung der therapeutischen Wirkung]. Die Rehabilitation 1987;26(4):184‐92.
Pfeiffer H, Wunderlich S, Bender W, Elz U, Horn B. Music improvisation with schizophrenic patients‐‐a controlled study in the assessment of therapeutic effects. Rehabilitation 1987;26(4):184‐92. [MEDLINE: 3423420]

Reker 1991 {published data only}

Reker T. Music therapy evaluated by schizophrenic patients. Psychiatrische Praxis 1991;18(6):216‐21.

Schmuttermayer 1983 {published data only}

Schmuttermayer R. Possibilities for inclusion of group music therapeutic methods in the treatment of psychotic patients [Moeglichkeit der Einbeziehung gruppentherapeutischer Methoden in die Behandung von Psychotikern]. Psychiatrie, Neurologie und Medizinische Psychologie 1983;35(1):49‐53.

Silverman 2003a {published data only}

Silverman MJ. Contingency songwriting to reduce combativeness and non‐cooperation in a client with schizophrenia: A case study. The Arts in Psychotherapy 2003a;30(1):25‐33.

Silverman 2009 {published data only}

Silverman MJ. The effect of single‐session psychoeducational music therapy on verbalizations and perceptions in psychiatric patients. Journal of Music Therapy 2009;46(2):105‐31.

Skelly 1952 {published data only}

Skelly CG, Haslerud GM. Music and the general activity of apathetic schizophrenics. Journal and the General Activity of Apathetic Schizophrenics 1952;47:188‐92.

Song 1994 {published data only}

Song Y, Cheng X, Fan Z. An analysis of effects of operative music therapy on emotion and social interaction of patients with chronic schizophrenia. Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation 1994;9(4):178‐9, 180‐1.

Steinberg 1991 {published data only}

Steinberg R, Kimming V, Raith L, Gunther W, Bogner J, Timmermann T. Music psychopathology: The course of musical expression during music therapy with psychiatric inpatients. Psychopathology 1991;24:121‐9.

Su 1999 {published data only}

Su L, Fan Z, Qu Y. The effect of dance therapy for chronic schizophrenic patient [dui man xing jing shen bing huan zhe fu yi wu dao zhi liao de liao xiao guan cha]. Chinese Journal of Psychiatry 1999;32(3):167‐9.

Su 2005 {published data only}

Su H, Zhang HD, Du XS. The synergistic effects of comprehensive rehabilitation on the negative symptoms of patients with schizophrenia [zong he xing kang fu zhi liao dui man xing fen lie zheng yin xing zheng zhuang de zeng xiao zuo yong]. Sichuan Mental Health 2005;18(3):172‐3. [CAJ]

Tan 2009 {published data only}

Tan S, Yizhuang Z. Computerized cognitive remediation therapy for patients with schizophrenia, a multicenter randomized controlled study. ChiCTR‐TRC‐00000249.

Tang 2002 {published data only}

Tang HYi, Zhang XY, Wu LM. The comparison study of brain function curer as a adjuvant therapy for schizophrenia patients [nao gong neng bao jian yi fu zhu zhi liao jing shen fen lie zheng de dui zhao yan jiu]. Chinese Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases 2002;28(1):53‐4.

Thaut 1989 {published data only}

Thaut MH. The influence of music therapy interventions on self‐rated changes in relaxation, affect, and thought in psychiatric prisoner‐patients. Journal of Music Therapy 1989;26:155‐66.

Troice 2003 {published data only}

Troice EM, Sosa JJS. The musical experience as a curative factor in music therapy with patients with chronic schizophrenia. Salud Mental 2003;26(4):47‐58.

Valencia 2006 {published data only}

Valencia M, Murow E, Rascón ML. Comparison of three methods of intervention in schizophrenia: psychosocial therapy, music therapy, and multiple therapies. [Comparación de tres modalidades de intervención en esquizofrenia: terapi psicosocial, musicoterapia y terapias múltiples]. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicologia 2006;38(3):535‐49.

Wahass 1997 {published data only}

Wahass S, Kent G. The modification of psychological interventions for persistent auditory hallucinations to an Islamic culture. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy 1997;25:351‐64.

Wang 2002a {published data only}

Wang H, Wang D, Zhou XH. The observation of the effect of music therapy on 50 chronic schizophrenia patients. [yin yue zhi liao dui 50 li man xing jing shen fen lie zheng de kang fu xiao guo guan cha]. Harbin Mecical Journal 2002;22(1):33‐4.

Wang 2002b {published data only}

Wang Aw, Shi F, Dong X. Influence of traditional pentatonic music on brain electrical activity mapping of schizophrenics [wu yin yue qu dui jing shen fen lie zheng nao dian huo dong de ying xiang]. Chinese Mental Health Journal 2002;16(7):494‐5.

Wang 2005 {published data only}

Wang Yi‐Yun, Wang Qiu‐Yan, Cheng Ai‐Ping, Li Shui‐Xiang. The effects of music therapy on the rehabilitation of patients with chronic schizophrenia [yin yue liao fa zai man xing jing shen fen lie zheng kang fu zhi liao zhong de zuo yong]. Journal of Qiqihar Medical 2005;26(9):1011‐2. [CAJ]
Wang Yi‐Yun, Wang Qiu‐Yan, Cheng Ai‐Ping, Li Shui‐Xiang. The effects of music therapy on the rehabilitation of patients with chronic schizophrenia [yin yue liao fa zai man xing jing shen fen lie zheng kang fu zhi liao zhong de zuo yong]. Chinese Journal of Behavioral Medical Science 2005;14(9):810.

Wang 2006 {published data only}

Wang HM, Zhang DM. The influence of music therapy on patients' social function with chronic schizophrenia [yin yue liao fa dui man xing jing shen fen lie huan zhe de she hui gong neng de ying xiang]. Practice Nursing Care and Study Journal 2006;3(1):7‐8.

Wang 2007 {published data only}

Wang Z, Li X. Comparative study of the music therapy on the negative symptoms of schizophrenia with native risperidone [yin yue zhi liao he bing guo chan li pei tong zhi liao jing shen fen lie zheng yin xing zheng zhuang dui zhao yan jiu]. Chinese Journal of Health Psychology 2007;15(2):155‐6. [CHINESE: Academic Journals]

Warren 1980 {published data only}

Warren J. Paried‐associate learning in chronic institutionalised subjects using synthesized sounds, nonsense syllables, and rhythmic sounds. Journal of Music Therapy 1980;17(1):16‐25.

Wu 2000 {published data only}

Wu LR. The effect of musical therapy on chronic schizophrenics rehabilitation [yin yue liao fa zai man xing jing shen fen lie zheng kang fu zhi liao zhong de zuo yong]. Modern Rehabilitation 2000;4(4):550‐1.

Wu 2003 {published data only}

Wu Y, Zhao F. Effect of music and dance on recovery of schizophrenia [yin yue wu dao dui jing shen fen lie zheng kang fu de ying xiang]. Health Psychology Journal 2003;11(3):207‐8.

Xiao 2005 {published data only}

Xiao LR, Pei XY, Wang CY. The effect factors of rehabilitation measures on the self‐managing ability and social ability of patients with schizophrenia. [yin xing jing shen fen lie huan zhe zi li he she hui neng li hui fu cuo shi ji ying xiang yin su]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Rehabilitation 2005;9(20):225. [CAJ]

Yang 2005 {published data only}

Yang RL, Lv HX, Lou F. The effect of group psychotherapy on the recovery of patients with chronic schizophrenia [xin li xiao zu zhi liao de man xing jing shen fen lie zheng huan zhe de kang fu zuo yong]. Occupation and Health 2005;21(6):936. [CAJ]

Zhang 2003a {published data only}

Zhang ML. The effect of active and receptive music therapy on patients with chronic schizophrenia [zhu bei dong yin yue zhi liao dui man xing jing shen fen lie zheng liao xiao fen xi]. Health Psychology Journal 2003;11(5):370‐1.

Zhang 2003b {published data only}

Zhang Y. Effect of music therapy and behavioral therapy on schizophrenia patients. China Clinical Rehabilitation 2003;7(5):857.

Zhang 2005 {published data only}

Zhang HJ. The effects of music therapy and physiotherapy on the negative symptoms of schizophrenia [yin ti liao fa dui jing shen fen lie yin xing zheng zhuang huan zhe de ying xiang]. Practical Journal of Medicine and Pharmacy 2005;22(9):832. [CAJ]

Zhou 2003 {published data only}

Zhou B, Xu XB, Yang GZ. The effect of music therapy on the negative symptoms of patients with schizophrenia [yin yue liao fa dui jing shen fen lie zheng yin xing zheng zhuang de liao xiao fen xi]. Ningxia Medical Journal 2003;25(4):247‐8.

Zhou 2006 {published data only}

Zhou Y‐P, Shou Y‐Q, Tang W‐Z. Comparative study of the rehabilitative effect of different types of receptive music therapy on patients with schizophrenia [bu tong gan shou shi yin yue liao fa dui jing shen fen lie zheng huan zhe de kang fu zuo yong]. Shanghai Nursing Journal 2006;6(6):12‐4.

Zhu 2002 {published data only}

Zhu Y, Jin X. Effect of music treatment on memory decrease of patients with schizophrenia caused by clozapine [yin yue zhi liao mu dan ping suo zhi ji yi li xia jiang de dui zhao yan jiu]. Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice 2002;8(11):684‐6. [CAJ; CBM]

Gold 2005b {published data only}

Gold C, Rolvsjord R, Aaro LE, Aarre T, Tjemsland L, Stige B. Resource‐oriented music therapy for psychiatric patients with low therapy motivation: protocol for a randomised controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry 2005;5(39):1‐8. [MEDLINE: 0; MEDLINE: 16259626]
Gold C, Tjemsland L, Tytlandsvik M, Heskestad S, Aarre T, Stige B. Resource‐oriented music therapy for psychiatric patients with low therapy motivation: a randomised controlled trial. http:, www.clinicaltrials.gov2005.

Grocke 2009b {published data only}

Grocke D. Evaluation of a group music therapy program on quality of life in people living with severe and enduring mental illness (SEMI) in the community. ANZCTR 23.9.2008.

Allison 2002

Allison, PD. Missing Data. Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.

Altman 1996

Altman DG, Bland JM. Detecting skewness from summary information. BMJ 1996;313(7066):1200.

Andreasen 1982

Andreasen NC. Negative symptoms in schizophrenia: Definition and reliability. Archives of General Psychiatry 1982;39:784‐8.

Andritzky 1996

Andritzky W. Alternative treatment in psychiatric and psychotherapy facilities in Germany [Unkonventionelle Heilweisen in psychiatrischen und psychosomatischen Kliniken in Deutschland]. Gesundheitswesen 1996;58(1):21‐30.

Ansdell 2010a

Ansell G, Davidson J, Magee WL, Meehan J, Procter S. From "This F***ing life" to "that's better"...in four minutes: an interdisciplinary study of music therapy's "present moments" and their potential for affect modulation. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy 2010;19(1):3‐28.

Ansdell 2010b

Ansdell G, Meehan J. "Some light at the end of the tunnel": Exploring users' evidence for the effectiveness of music therapy in adult mental health settings. Music and Medicine 2010;2(1):29‐40.

Atkinson 1994

Atkinson C, Greenfield, T. Client Satisfaction Questionnaire ‐ 8 and Service Satisfaction Scale 30. Psychological Testing: Treatment Planning and Outcome Assessment. San Francisco, CA: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1994.

Berg 1948

Berg EA. A simple objective technique for measuring flexibility in thinking. The Journal of General Psychology 1948;39:15‐22.

Bland 1997

Bland JM. Statistics notes. Trials randomised in clusters. BMJ 1997;315:600.

Boissel 1999

Boissel JP, Cucherat M, Li W, Chatellier G, Gueyffier F, Buyse M, Li W, Boutitie F, Nony P, Haugh M, Mignot G. The problem of therapeutic efficacy indices. 3. Comparison of the indices and their use [Apercu sur la problematique des indices d'efficacite therapeutique, 3: comparaison des indices et utilisation. Groupe d'Etude des Indices D'efficacite]. Therapie 1999;54(4):405‐11. [PUBMED: 10667106]

Bruscia 1998

Bruscia KE. Defining music therapy. 2nd Edition. Gilsum, NH: Barcelona Publishers, 1998.

Cohen 1988

Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd Edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988.

Davey 1997

Davey Smith G, Egger M. Meta‐analyses of randomised controlled trials. Lancet 1997;350(9085):1182.

Deeks 2000

Deeks J. Issues in the selection for meta‐analyses of binary data. Proceedings of the 8th International Cochrane Colloquium; 2000 Oct 25‐28; Cape Town. Cape Town: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2000.

Divine 1992

Divine GW, Brown JT, Frazier LM. The unit of analysis error in studies about physicians' patient care behavior. Journal of General Internal Medicine 1992;7(6):623‐9.

Donner 2002

Donner A, Klar N. Issues in the meta‐analysis of cluster randomized trials. Statistics in Medicine 2002;21:2971‐80.

Egger 1997

Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta‐analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629‐34.

Elbourne 2002

Elbourne D, Altman DG, Higgins JPT, Curtina F, Worthingtond HV, Vaile A. Meta‐analyses involving cross‐over trials: methodological issues. International Journal of Epidemiology 2002;31(1):140‐9.

Furukawa 2006

Furukawa TA, Barbui C, Cipriani A, Brambilla P, Watanabe N. Imputing missing standard deviations in meta‐analyses can provide accurate results. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2006;59(7):7‐10.

Gold 2004

Gold C. The use of effect sizes in music therapy research. Music Therapy Perspectives 2004;22(2):91‐5.

Gold 2009

Gold C, Solli HP, Krüger V, Lie SA. Dose‐response relationship in music therapy for people with serious mental disorders: Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clinical Psychology Review 2009;29(3):193‐207.

Gronwall 1977

Gronwall MD. Paced auditory serial‐addition task: a measure of recovery from concussion. Perceptual & Motor Skills 1977;44:367‐73.

Gulliford 1999

Gulliford MC. Components of variance and intraclass correlations for the design of community‐based surveys and intervention studies: data from the Health Survey for England 1994. American Journal of Epidemiology 1999;149:876‐83.

Hamilton 1960

Hamilton M. A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 1960;23:56‐62.

Hamilton 2000

Hamilton M. Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (Ham‐D). In: American Psychiatric Association, editor(s). Handbook of Psychiatric Measures. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 2000.

Higgins 2003

Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta‐analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557‐60.

Higgins 2008

Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester, UK: Wiley‐Blackwell, 2008.

Higgins 2011

Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.2 [updated September 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org..

Honigfeld 1965

Honigfeld G, Gillis RD, Klett CJ. Nurses' observation scale for inpatient evaluation: a new scale for measuring improvement in chronic schizophrenia. Journal of Clinical Psychology 1965;21:65‐71.

Jones 2004

Jones C, Cormac I, Silveira da Mota Neto J, Campbell C. Cognitive behaviour therapy for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004, Issue 4. CD000524. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000524.pub2]

Kay 1986

Kay SR, Opler LA, Fiszbein A. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Manual. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi‐Health Systems, 1986.

Kay 1987

Kay SR, Fiszbein A, Opler LA. The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin 1987;13(2):261‐76.

Lee 2001

Lee S. From diversity to unity. The classification of mental disorders in 21st‐century China. Psychiatric Clinics of North America 2001;24(3):421‐31.

Leucht 2005

Leucht S, Kane JM, Kissling W, Hamann J, Etschel E, Engel RR. What does the PANSS mean?. Schizophrenia Research 2005;79(2‐3):231‐8. [PUBMED: 15982856]

Leucht 2005a

Leucht S, Kane JM, Kissling W, Hamann J, Etschel E, Engel R. Clinical implications of brief psychiatric rating scale scores. British Journal of Psychiatry 2005;187:366‐71. [PUBMED: 16199797]

Leucht 2007

Leucht S, Engel RR, Bauml J, Davis JM. Is the superior efficacy of new generation antipsychotics an artifact of LOCF?. Schizophrenia Bulletin 2007;33(1):183‐91. [PUBMED: 16905632]

Maranto 1993

Maranto CD. Music therapy: International perspectives. Pipersville, PA: Jeffrey, 1993.

Marshall 2000

Marshall M. Unpublished rating scales: a major source of bias in randomised controlled trials of treatments for schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychiatry 2000;176:249‐52.

Moher 2001

Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel‐group randomised trials. The Lancet 2001;357:1191‐4.

Mössler 2011

Mössler Karin. “I am a psychotherapeutically oriented music therapist.” Theory construction and its influence on professional identity formation under the example of the Viennese School of Music Therapy. Nordic Journal for Music Therapy 2011;20(2):155‐84.

Nelson 1976

Nelson HE. A modified card sorting test sensitive to frontal lobe defects. Cortex 1976;12:313‐24.

Oerter 2001

Oerter U, Scheytt‐Holzer N, Kächele H. Musiktherapie in der Psychiatrie: Versorgungslage und Stand der Forschung [Music therapy in psychiatry: State of implementation and of research]. Nervenheilkunde 2001;20(8):428‐33.

Overall 1962

Overall JE, Gorham DR. The brief psychiatric rating scale. Psychological Reports 1962;10:799‐812.

Overall 1988

Overall JE, Gorham DR. The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS): recent developments in ascertainment and scaling. Psychopharmacol Bull 1988;24:97‐9.

Rolvsjord 2001

Rolvsjord R. Sophie learns to play her songs of tears: A case study exploring the dialectics between didactic and psychotherapeutic music therapy practices. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy 2001;10(1):77‐85.

Rosvold 1956

Rosvold HE, Mirsky AF, Sarason I, Bransome ED, Beck LH. A continuous performance test of brain damage. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1956;20:343‐50.

Saggino 1983

Saggino A. Literature review on the Wechsler Memory Scale as a clinical and research tool. [Rassegna della letterature sulla Wechsler Memory Scale come strumento clinico e di ricerca]. Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata 1983;165:37‐44.

Schünemann 2008

Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ, Glasziou P, et al. Chapter 12: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Higgins JPT, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008:359‐83.

Silverman 2003b

Silverman MJ. The influence of music on the symptoms of psychosis: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Music Therapy 2003b;40(1):27‐40.

Solli 2008

Solli HP. "Shut up and play!" Improvisational use of popular music for a man with schizophrenia. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy 2008;17(1):67‐77.

Spitzer 2000

Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Endicott J. Global assessment scale (GAS), global assessment of functioning (GAF) scale, social and occupational functioning assessment scale (SOFAS). In: American Psychiatric Association, editor(s). Handbook of Psychiatric Measures. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 2000.

Stern 2010

Stern D. The issue of vitality. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy 2010;19(2):88‐102.

Tombaugh 2006

Tombaugh TN. A comprehensive review of the Paced Auditory Serial Addiction Test (PASAT). Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 2006;21:53‐76.

Trevarthen 2000

Trevarthen C, Malloch S. The dance of wellbeing: defining the musical therapeutic effect. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy 2000;9(2):3‐17.

Tönnies 1996

Tönnies S, Plöhn S, Krippendorf U. Skalen zur psychischen Gesundheit. Heidelberg, Germany: Roland Asanger Verlag, 1996.

Ukoumunne 1999

Ukoumunne OC, Gulliford MC, Chinn S, Sterne JAC, Burney PGJ. Methods for evaluating area‐wide and organisation‐based intervention in health and health care: a systematic review. Health Technology Assessment 1999;3(5):1‐75.

Wigram 1999

Wigram T, De Backer J. Clinical applications of music therapy in psychiatry. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 1999.

Wigram 2002

Wigram T. Indications in music therapy: Evidence from assessment that can identify the expectations of music therapy as a treatment for autistic spectrum disorder (ASD). Meeting the challenge of evidence based practice. British Journal of Music Therapy 2002;16(1):5‐28.

Xia 2009

Xia J, Adams CE, Bhagat N, Bhagat V, Bhoopathi P, El‐Sayeh H, Pinfold V, Takriti Y. Loss to outcomes stakeholder survey: the LOSS study. Psychiatric Bulletin 2009;33(7):254‐7.

Zhang 2003

Zhang MY. Mental assessment manual (jing shen ping ding shou ce). Human Scientific and Technical Publishers, 2003:35‐9.

References to other published versions of this review

Ir a:

Gold 2005a

Gold C, Heldal TO, Dahle T, Wigram T. Music therapy for schizophrenia or schizophrenia‐like illnesses. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD004025. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004025.pub2]

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

Ir a:

Ceccato 2009

Methods

Allocation: randomised.
Blindness: assessors were masked to treatment.
Duration: 4 months.
Design: parallel group.

Participants

Diagnosis: people with schizophrenia (ICD‐10).
History: not reported.
N = 67.
Age: range 20 to 60 years.
Sex: 41 M, 26 F.
Setting: in‐ and outpatients (private clients).

Interventions

1. Group music therapy: STAM (one weekly session; total 16 sessions). N = 37.
2. Standard care (medication and other therapeutic treatment indicated for schizophrenia). N = 30.

Outcomes

Cognitive functioning: BCST, CCPT, PASAT, WMS.

Notes

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Randomised ‐ no further details.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Assessors were masked to treatment.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

No drop outs.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Unclear risk

All outcomes were considered in the analysis.

Other bias

Unclear risk

Adequate music therapy method: unclear (highly structured approach, relational aspects unclear).
Adequate music therapy training: yes (based on a general statement in the paper: 'qualified music therapists' and personal communication with the authors).
No personal, financial, or any other interests producing bias could be found.

He 2005

Methods

Allocation: randomised ‐ no further details.
Blindness: unknown.
Duration: 6 weeks.
Design: parallel group.

Participants

Diagnosis: schizophrenia type II (CCMD‐3).
History: approx. 9 years of disorder.
N = 60.
Age: mean 35 years, SD 8.
Sex: 51 M, 9 F.
Setting: inpatients.

Interventions

1. Receptive and 'participative' group music therapy (music listening, or music listening in combination with reading poems or dancing, music was chosen by the participants after an "induction" given by the therapist), five one‐hour sessions per week (total 30 sessions). N = 30.
2. Standard care (medication only). N = 30.

Outcomes

Mental state: SANS.
Not used: Prolactin levels (biomarker for mood: high = good).

Notes

Music therapy was conducted by musicians.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

No details given.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

No information about how many participants have completed the study can be found in the results or discussion part of the article. According to the study design (only inpatients) and Chinese reporting standards (drop outs are usually reported if there are any) we assume that all participants have completed the study.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All outcome measures were considered in the analysis.

Other bias

High risk

Adequate music therapy method: yes.
Adequate music therapy training: unclear (music therapy was conducted by musicians who worked full time as music therapists at the hospital).
No personal, financial, or any other interests producing bias could be found.

Li 2007

Methods

Allocation: randomised ‐ no further details.
Blindness: unknown.
Duration: 6 weeks.
Design: parallel group.

Participants

Diagnosis: schizophrenia (CCMD‐3).
History: not reported.
N = 60.
Age: mean 32, SD 12.
Sex: 60 M, 0 F.
Setting: inpatients.

Interventions

1. Receptive group music therapy (music listening, music listening in combination with verbal inductions given by the therapist, 'positive hypnosis'/positive imagery, ), 5 weekly 40‐min sessions per week (total 30 sessions). N = 30.
2. Standard care (supportive counselling). N=30.

Outcomes

Mental state: depression (SDS).
Mental state: anxiety (SAS).
Social functioning: NOSIE subscale.
Not used: 7 other subscales of NOSIE.

Notes

Music therapy was conducted by nurses, unclear how much they were trained in music therapy.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

No details given.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

All 60 participants completed the trial.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All outcome measures were considered in the analysis.

Other bias

Unclear risk

Adequate music therapy method: yes.
Adequate music therapy training: unclear (music therapy was conducted by nurses with 'music therapy ability').
No personal, financial, or any other interests producing bias could be found.

Talwar 2006

Methods

Allocation: randomised ‐ block randomisation with ratio of experimental treatment to control treatment 1:2.
Blindness: single ‐ assessor blinded; success of blinding verified by letting assessors guess the allocated condition; more than 50% guessed correctly, but this may be confounded with treatment effect.
Duration: 3 months.
Design: multicenter, 4 sites.

Participants

Diagnosis: schizophrenia or related psychoses (ICD‐10: F2).
History: not reported.
N = 81.
Age: mean 37 years, range 18 to 64.
Sex: 60 M, 21 F.
Setting: inpatients.

Interventions

1. Active individual music therapy (improvisation, songs, dialogue), weekly sessions of 50 min (total 12 sessions). N = 33.
2. Standard care (medication, nursing care, access to occupational, social and other activities). N = 48.

Outcomes

Mental state: PANSS.
General functioning: GAF.
Satisfaction with care: CSQ.

Unable to use ‐Quality of life: SFQ (unknown reliability and validity).
Service outcomes: HAS, Use of Hospital Services, ePEX (unknown reliability and validity).

Notes

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Computer‐generated list of random numbers.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Randomisation was conducted by a person independent of the researcher, and extensive steps were taken to mask the researcher to the participants' allocation status.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Interviews were conducted by a researcher masked to treatment condition; a test of the success of masking was provided: Interviewer attempted to guess the allocation status of each of the participants after three month follow‐up data had been collected (kappa = .31, P <. 01).

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Analysis was carried out on an intention‐to‐treat basis. Multiple imputation was used to account for the missing data in outcome measures at follow‐up. This method imputes m > 1 plausible values for each missing value, under the assumption of missing at random.

In this review, only the actually observed data were used, not the imputed data. Multiple imputation is not recommended when only dependent variables are missing (Allison 2002, p. 54, p. 70).

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All outcome measures were considered in the analysis.

Other bias

Low risk

Adequate music therapy method: yes.
Adequate music therapy training: yes (all music therapists attended an approved music therapy course and received fortnightly supervision).
No personal, financial, or any other interests producing bias could be found.

Tang 1994

Methods

Allocation: randomised ‐ no further details.
Blindness: single ‐ assessor blinded.
Duration: 1 month.
Design: parallel group.

Participants

Diagnosis: residual schizophrenia (DSM‐III‐R).
History: not reported.
N = 76.
Age: not reported.
Sex: not reported.
Setting: inpatients.

Interventions

1. Active and receptive large‐group music therapy (music listening, singing and playing on instruments, discussion), five one‐hour sessions per week (on average 19 sessions). N = 38.
2. Standard care (medication only). N = 38.

Outcomes

Mental state: SANS.

Unable to use ‐
Disability: Disability Assessment Schedule (DAS) (insufficient data).

Notes

Author unable to provide additional data.
Music therapy was conducted by clinicians (doctor, nurses) with limited training.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Nurses who did the SANS and DAS assessment for participants were blind to treatment status.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

All 76 participants completed the trial.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All outcome measures were considered in the analysis.

Other bias

Unclear risk

Adequate music therapy method: yes.
Adequate music therapy training: unclear (one doctor and two nurses conducted the music therapy. Two of them attended a two‐week music therapy course).
No financial, personal or other interests producing bias detected.

Ulrich 2007

Methods

Allocation: randomised ‐ no further details.
Blindness: single ‐ assessor blinded; assessors unaware of study aim; success of blinding verified by letting assessors guess what the study aim was; none were aware that the study aim involved music therapy.
Duration: 4.8 weeks.
Design: parallel group.

Participants

Diagnosis: schizophrenia or related psychoses (27 of 37 had F20 in ICD‐10).
History: not reported.
N = 37.
Age: mean 38 years, range 22 to 58.
Sex: 20 M, 17 F.
Setting: inpatients.

Interventions

1. Active group music therapy (focusing on musical processes and discussion of patients' problems), on average 7.5 sessions of 60 to 105 minutes. N = 21.
2. Standard care (medication, "other" activities ‐ no detailed description given). N = 16.

Outcomes

Mental state: SANS.
Quality of life: SPG.

Unable to use ‐
Social functioning (unvalidated subscale of published scale).
Satisfaction with care (unpublished scale).

Notes

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

A die was thrown.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Researchers and patients were blinded to the fact that research of music therapy was the study aim.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Drop outs were reported. Intention‐to‐treat analysis was used: Participants whose diagnosis was changed after inclusion in the study were not excluded.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All outcome measures were considered in the analysis.

Other bias

Low risk

Adequate music therapy method: yes.
Adequate music therapy training: yes (based on a general statement: 'qualified music therapists' and a reference in the article).
No financial, personal or other interests producing bias detected.

Wen 2005

Methods

Allocation: randomised; no further details given.
Blindness: unknown.
Duration:6 weeks.
Design: parallel group.

Participants

Diagnosis: schizophrenia (CCMD‐3).
History: not reported.
N = 30.
Age:15 to 50.
Sex: 21 M, 9 F.
Setting: inpatients

Interventions

1. Receptive group music therapy (music listening, other music activities: dancing, discussion emphasising the emotional aspects of the music while listening to it), five one‐hour sessions per week (total 30 sessions). N = 16.
2. Standard care (medication only, no anxiolytic or antidepressant). N = 14

Outcomes

Mental state: BPRS; depression (SDS, Ham‐D).
Unable to use ‐ Inpatient Recovery Effect Scale (unpublished scale).

Notes

Music therapy was conducted by the authors (probably psychiatrists) and nurses. No information given if these clinicians were trained in music therapy.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

No details given.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

All participants completed the trial.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All outcome measures were considered in the analysis.

Other bias

Unclear risk

Adequate music therapy method: yes.
Adequate music therapy training: unclear (no information was given, if the persons conducting music therapy, nurses and probably psychiatrists, were trained in music therapy).
No financial, personal or other interests producing bias detected.

Yang 1998

Methods

Allocation: randomised ‐ no further details.
Blindness: not reported; assessments by two psychiatrists.
Duration: 3 months.
Design: parallel group.

Participants

Diagnosis: schizophrenia (CCMD‐2).
History: chronic, duration of disorder 2 to 26 years.
N = 72.
Age: range 21‐55 years.
Sex: 41 M, 29 F (reported for 70 valid cases).
Setting: inpatients.

Interventions

1. Active and receptive individual and group music therapy (music listening, improvisation, discussion), six two‐hour sessions per week (total 78 sessions). N = 41.
2. Standard care (medication only). N = 31.

Outcomes

Global state: No clinically important improvement (as rated by trialists).
Mental state: BPRS, SANS.
Social functioning: SDSI.

Unable to use ‐
Mental state: PSE (insufficient data).

Notes

Author unable to provide additional data.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details given.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

No details given.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Two drop outs were reported and the reported data are based on a total number excluding the drop outs. No participants with complete data were excluded.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All outcome measures were considered in the analysis.

Other bias

Low risk

Adequate music therapy method: yes.
Adequate music therapy training: yes (well‐known Chinese music therapist was involved in the project).
No financial, personal or other interests producing bias detected.

BCST ‐ Bergs' Card Sorting Test
BPRS – Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale
CCMD‐2/3 ‐ Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders 2/3
CCPT ‐ Conners Continuous Performance Task 10
CSQ ‐ Client Satisfaction Questionnaire
DAS ‐ Disability Assessment Schedule
DSM‐III‐R ‐ Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders‐III‐R
ePEX ‐ Protechnic Exeter
F ‐ Female
GAF – General Assessment of Function
Ham‐D – Hamilton Depression Scale
HAS – Hamilton Anxiety Scale
ICD‐10 ‐ ICD‐10: F2 – International Classification of Diseases (version 10); ‘F’ refers to large disease sub‐categories within ICD
M ‐ Male
NOSIE ‐ Nurses' Observation Scale for Inpatient Evaluation
PANSS ‐ The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale
PASAT ‐ Auditory Serial Addition Paced Test
PSE ‐ Present State Examination Change Rating Scale
SANS ‐ Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms
SAS ‐ Self‐Rating Anxiety Scale
SD – Standard deviation
SDS ‐ Self‐Rating Depression Scale
SDSI ‐ Social Disability Schedule for Inpatients
SFQ ‐ The Social Functioning Questionnaire
SPG ‐ Skalen zur psychischen Gesundheit
STAM ‐ Sound Training Attention and Memory
WMS ‐ Wechsler Memory Scale

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Ir a:

Study

Reason for exclusion

Adler 2005

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (medication versus placebo).

Apter 1978

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (movement therapy, dance therapy).

Arango 2003

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (medication).

Barrowclough 2001

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (treatment package versus standard care).

Bean 1964

Allocation: not randomised (all received the same intervention).

Bechdolf 2005

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (CBT versus supportive counselling).

Brotons 1987

Allocation: unclear (unable to retrieve full report).

Cassity 1976

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders.
Intervention: music therapy versus standard care.
Outcomes: no usable and relevant data.

Castilla‐Puentes 2002

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders.
Intervention: music therapy versus supportive talking/counselling.
Outcomes: no usable data (unable to retrieve full report).

Ceccato 2006

Allocation: not randomised (CCT, matched groups).

Chambliss 1996

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening).

Cook 1973

Allocation: not randomised (single case study).

de l'Etoile 2002

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Drury 1996

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (cognitive therapy versus structured activities and informal support).

Gaszner 2009

Allocation: unclear (CCT; author was contacted but we did not get the requested information).
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (one medication versus two or more medications versus medication and complex therapy including psychotherapy, sociotherapy, psychiatric rehabilitation).

Glicksohn 2000

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (only music listening).

Green 1987

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders.
Interventions: not music therapy (art therapy versus standard care).

Grocke 2009a

Allocation: not randomised (pre‐post test).

Hannes 1974

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (recreational therapy/socialising).

Hayashi 2002

Allocation: not randomised (CCT/comparison of 2 cohorts).

Hodgson 1996

not able to retrieve information needed.

Hogarty 1988

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (family therapy versus standard care).

Hu 2004

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music‐sport therapy: music listening, karaoke, sport activities).

Hustig 1990

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Johnston 2002

Allocation: not randomised (n‐of‐1‐CCT).

Kallert 2004

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia and other mental disorders.
Interventions: not music therapy (treatment package).

Kong 2007

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with chronic schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening only).

Krajewski 1993

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (CBT versus art therapy versus CBT and art therapy).

Leung 1998

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (Karaoke therapy versus simple singing)

Li 2005

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with chronic schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music education, sport activities, gardening).

Lin 2003

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia on recovery stage.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening only).

Margo 1981

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening only).

Martinez 2005

Allocation: not randomised (CCT, quasi‐randomised).

McInnis 1990

Allocation: not randomised (single case study).

Meschede 1983

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Metzner 2010

Allocation: not randomised (single case study).

Moe 2000

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Murow 1997

Allocation: not randomised (CCT, allocation by order of intake).

Na 2009

Allocation: not randomised (CCT, cross‐over design)

Nelson 1991

Allocation: not randomised (CCT).

Ni 2002

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening only).

Olbrich 1990

Allocation: not randomised (CCT, allocation by order of intake).

Pavlicevic 1994

Allocation: not randomised (CCT, matched groups).

Pfeiffer 1987

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: music therapy versus standard care.
Outcomes: no usable data.

Reker 1991

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Schmuttermayer 1983

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Silverman 2003a

Allocation: not randomised (single case study).

Silverman 2009

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia and other mental disorders.
Interventions: music therapy.
Outcomes: we contacted the author but did not receive the data of the subset of participants with schizophrenia.

Skelly 1952

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Song 1994

Allocation: not randomised (groups were matched by age, sex, education, and diagnosis).

Steinberg 1991

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Su 1999

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with chronic schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (dance therapy).

Su 2005

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (group psychotherapy, behaviour therapy, recreational therapy, music listening, other activities).

Tan 2009

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (computerised cognitive remediation therapy), active control group (treatment package including occupational therapy, recreational therapy and music therapy).

Tang 2002

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (brainwave generator combined with electronic music instruments)

Thaut 1989

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Troice 2003

Allocation: not randomised (single group study).

Valencia 2006

Allocation: not randomised to music therapy versus placebo or standard care (random allocation of participants to three active treatment conditions including music therapy; a control group (medication only) was not randomised but obtained from a waiting list).

Wahass 1997

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Intervention: not music therapy (treatment package).

Wang 2002a

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with chronic schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening only).

Wang 2002b

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening only).

Wang 2005

Allocation: not randomised (CCT, quasi‐randomised according to the date of entry).

Wang 2006

Allocation: not randomised (CCT, quasi‐randomised according to the date of entry).

Wang 2007

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening, Karaoke singing by the patients, without music therapist).

Warren 1980

Allocation: not randomised (all received the same stimuli within the same session); not an intervention study.

Wu 2000

Allocation: not randomised (pre‐post test design).

Wu 2003

Allocation: not randomised (uncontrolled pre‐post design).

Xiao 2005

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with chronic schizophrenia.
Interventions: unclear if music therapy (insufficient details), and not music therapy alone (treatment package: psychotherapy, recreational therapy, music therapy versus medical treatment).

Yang 2005

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with chronic schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (psychotherapy) versus active control group (recreational therapy: dance, music, reading, writing, drawing).

Zhang 2003a

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening, music appreciation, dancing).

Zhang 2003b

Allocation: possibly randomised, unclear.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: music therapy versus behaviour correcting therapy.

Zhang 2005

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (different music activities, e.g. singing, music education, dancing, watching MTV, are taking place in the patient's leisure time together with nurses who are not trained as music therapists).

Zhou 2003

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening).

Zhou 2006

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: music therapy versus active control group (music listening only).

Zhu 2002

Allocation: randomised.
Participants: people with schizophrenia.
Interventions: not music therapy (music listening only).

CBT – Cognitive Behavioural Therapy
CCT – Controlled Clinical Trial
MTV – Music Television

Characteristics of ongoing studies [ordered by study ID]

Ir a:

Gold 2005b

Trial name or title

Resource‐oriented music therapy for psychiatric patients with low therapy motivation (RCT‐MTPSY, registration no. NCT00137189).

Methods

Allocation: randomised, stratified by treatment centre and type of disorder (psychotic versus non‐psychotic).
Blindness: single ‐ assessor blinded.
Duration: treatment duration 3 months, latest follow‐up 9 months.
Design: parallel groups.

Participants

Diagnosis: people with a non‐organic mental disorder (F1 to F6 according to ICD‐10), presenting with a low therapy motivation and showing a willingness to work with music.
History: duration of disorder not specified.
N = 144.
Age: adults; minimum and maximum age not specified.
Sex: both males and females.
Setting: inpatients, day patients and outpatients.

Interventions

1. Individual resource‐oriented music therapy, 2 times a week over a period of 3 months, lasting 45 minutes; in addition to standard care.
2. Standard care. (Music therapy may be offered after 3 months.)

Outcomes

Mental state: Negative Symptoms (SANS), SANS Subscale Affective Flattening or Blunting.
Mental state: Brief Symptom Inventory‐18 (BSI‐18).
Mental state: Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI).
Mental state: Vitality (SF‐36 Health Survey).

General Functioning: Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF).

Interpersonal and social functioning: Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP‐32).

Intrapersonal functioning: Motivation for change, URICA.

Intrapersonal functioning: Self‐efficacy, General Perceived Sef‐Efficacy Scale.

Intrapersonal functioning: Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale (RSES).

Quality of life: Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnare‐18 (Q‐LES‐Q‐18).

Musical engagement: Interest in Music Scale (IiM).

Starting date

2004.

Contact information

Christian Gold.
E‐mail: [email protected]

Notes
Grocke 2009b

Trial name or title

Evaluation of a group music therapy program on quality of life in people living with severe and enduring mental illness (SEMI) in the community.

Methods

Allocation: randomised.
Blindness: only self‐report measures used.
Duration: 13 weeks.
Design: parallel groups.

Participants

Diagnosis: severe and enduring mental disorder (e.g. schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, major depression).
History: at least 2 years of disorder.
N = 160.
Age: minimum 18, no maximum limit.
Sex: both males and females.
Setting: outpatients.

Interventions

1. Group music therapy (including singing, percussive improvisation, writing and recording an original song).
2. Waiting list control.

Outcomes

Mental state: BSI.

Quality of life: Q‐LES‐Q‐18.

Social functioning: ESSI.

Intrapersonal functioning: Self‐esteem (RSES).

Starting date

2009.

Contact information

Denise Grocke.
E‐mail: [email protected].

Notes

BSI / BSI‐18 ‐ Brief Symptom Inventroy‐18
CGI ‐ Clinical Global Impressions Scale
SF‐36 ‐ Short Form‐36 Health Survey
ESSI ‐ ENRICHED Social Support Instrument
GAF ‐ Global Assessment of Functioning Scale
IiM ‐ Interest i Music
IIP‐32 ‐ Inventory of Interpersonal Problems
Q‐LES‐Q‐18 ‐ Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnare‐18
RCT randomised controlled trial
RSES ‐ Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale
SANS ‐ Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms
URICA ‐ The University of Rhode Island Change Assessment Scale

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Global state: No clinically important overall improvement (as rated by trialists) Show forest plot

1

72

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [0.03, 0.31]
Analysis 1.1
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 1 Global state: No clinically important overall improvement (as rated by trialists).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 1 Global state: No clinically important overall improvement (as rated by trialists).

1.1 20 or more sessions

1

72

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [0.03, 0.31]

2 Mental state: General ‐ 1a. Average endpoint score (PANSS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.36 [‐0.84, 0.12]
Analysis 1.2
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 2 Mental state: General ‐ 1a. Average endpoint score (PANSS, high score = poor).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 2 Mental state: General ‐ 1a. Average endpoint score (PANSS, high score = poor).

2.1 less than 20 sessions

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.36 [‐0.84, 0.12]

3 Mental state: General ‐ 1b. Average endpoint score (BPRS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

2

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only
Analysis 1.3
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 3 Mental state: General ‐ 1b. Average endpoint score (BPRS, high score = poor).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 3 Mental state: General ‐ 1b. Average endpoint score (BPRS, high score = poor).

3.1 20 or more sessions

2

100

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.73 [‐1.16, ‐0.31]

4 Mental state: Specific ‐ 2. Negative symptoms ‐ average endpoint score (SANS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

4

240

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.74 [‐1.00, ‐0.47]
Analysis 1.4
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 4 Mental state: Specific ‐ 2. Negative symptoms ‐ average endpoint score (SANS, high score = poor).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 4 Mental state: Specific ‐ 2. Negative symptoms ‐ average endpoint score (SANS, high score = poor).

4.1 less than 20 sessions

2

110

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.79 [‐1.19, ‐0.40]

4.2 20 or more sessions

2

130

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.69 [‐1.05, ‐0.33]

5 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3a. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (SDS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

2

90

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.63 [‐1.06, ‐0.21]
Analysis 1.5
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 5 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3a. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (SDS, high score = poor).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 5 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3a. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (SDS, high score = poor).

5.1 20 or more sessions

2

90

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.63 [‐1.06, ‐0.21]

6 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3b. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (Ham‐D, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

30

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.52 [‐1.25, 0.21]
Analysis 1.6
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 6 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3b. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (Ham‐D, high score = poor).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 6 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3b. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (Ham‐D, high score = poor).

6.1 20 or more sessions

1

30

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.52 [‐1.25, 0.21]

7 Mental state: Specific ‐ 4. Anxiety ‐ average endpoint score (SAS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.61 [‐1.13, ‐0.09]
Analysis 1.7
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 7 Mental state: Specific ‐ 4. Anxiety ‐ average endpoint score (SAS, high score = poor).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 7 Mental state: Specific ‐ 4. Anxiety ‐ average endpoint score (SAS, high score = poor).

7.1 20 or more sessions

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.61 [‐1.13, ‐0.09]

8 Leaving the study early Show forest plot

8

493

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.38, 2.78]
Analysis 1.8
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 8 Leaving the study early.

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 8 Leaving the study early.

8.1 less than 20 sessions

4

261

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.04 [0.36, 2.99]

8.2 20 or more sessions

4

232

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.06, 15.45]

9 General functioning: Average endpoint score (GAF, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.05 [‐0.53, 0.43]
Analysis 1.9
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 9 General functioning: Average endpoint score (GAF, high score = good).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 9 General functioning: Average endpoint score (GAF, high score = good).

9.1 less than 20 sessions

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.05 [‐0.53, 0.43]

10 Social functioning: Average endpoint score (SDSI, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

70

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.78 [‐1.27, ‐0.28]
Analysis 1.10
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 10 Social functioning: Average endpoint score (SDSI, high score = poor).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 10 Social functioning: Average endpoint score (SDSI, high score = poor).

10.1 20 or more sessions

1

70

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.78 [‐1.27, ‐0.28]

11 Behaviour: 1. Positive behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.24 [‐1.79, ‐0.68]
Analysis 1.11
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 11 Behaviour: 1. Positive behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 11 Behaviour: 1. Positive behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor).

11.1 20 or more sessions

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.24 [‐1.79, ‐0.68]

12 Behaviour: 2. Negative behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐2.22 [‐2.87, ‐1.57]
Analysis 1.12
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 12 Behaviour: 2. Negative behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 12 Behaviour: 2. Negative behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor).

12.1 20 or more sessions

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐2.22 [‐2.87, ‐1.57]

13 Cognitive functioning: 1. Attention ‐ average endpoint score (PASAT, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.22, 1.21]
Analysis 1.13
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 13 Cognitive functioning: 1. Attention ‐ average endpoint score (PASAT, high score = good).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 13 Cognitive functioning: 1. Attention ‐ average endpoint score (PASAT, high score = good).

13.1 less than 20 sessions

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.22, 1.21]

14 Cognitive functioning: 2. Vigilance and attention ‐ average endpoint score (CCPT, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [‐0.23, 0.74]
Analysis 1.14
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 14 Cognitive functioning: 2. Vigilance and attention ‐ average endpoint score (CCPT, high score = good).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 14 Cognitive functioning: 2. Vigilance and attention ‐ average endpoint score (CCPT, high score = good).

14.1 less than 20 sessions

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [‐0.23, 0.74]

15 Cognitive functioning: 3. Memory ‐ average endpoint score (WMS, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [‐0.06, 0.92]
Analysis 1.15
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 15 Cognitive functioning: 3. Memory ‐ average endpoint score (WMS, high score = good).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 15 Cognitive functioning: 3. Memory ‐ average endpoint score (WMS, high score = good).

15.1 less than 20 sessions

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [‐0.06, 0.92]

16 Cognitive functioning: 4. Abstract thinking ‐ average endpoint score (BCST, high score = good) ) Show forest plot

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [‐0.39, 0.58]
Analysis 1.16
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 16 Cognitive functioning: 4. Abstract thinking ‐ average endpoint score (BCST, high score = good) ).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 16 Cognitive functioning: 4. Abstract thinking ‐ average endpoint score (BCST, high score = good) ).

16.1 less than 20 sessions

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [‐0.39, 0.58]

17 Patient satisfaction: Average endpoint score (CSQ, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.32 [‐0.16, 0.80]
Analysis 1.17
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 17 Patient satisfaction: Average endpoint score (CSQ, high score = good).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 17 Patient satisfaction: Average endpoint score (CSQ, high score = good).

17.1 less than 20 sessions

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.32 [‐0.16, 0.80]

18 Quality of life: Average endpoint score (SPG, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

31

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.05 [‐0.66, 0.75]
Analysis 1.18
Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 18 Quality of life: Average endpoint score (SPG, high score = good).

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 18 Quality of life: Average endpoint score (SPG, high score = good).

18.1 less than 20 sessions

1

31

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.05 [‐0.66, 0.75]

Study flow diagram (all searches)
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram (all searches)

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 1 Global state: No clinically important overall improvement (as rated by trialists).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 1 Global state: No clinically important overall improvement (as rated by trialists).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 2 Mental state: General ‐ 1a. Average endpoint score (PANSS, high score = poor).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 2 Mental state: General ‐ 1a. Average endpoint score (PANSS, high score = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 3 Mental state: General ‐ 1b. Average endpoint score (BPRS, high score = poor).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 3 Mental state: General ‐ 1b. Average endpoint score (BPRS, high score = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 4 Mental state: Specific ‐ 2. Negative symptoms ‐ average endpoint score (SANS, high score = poor).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 4 Mental state: Specific ‐ 2. Negative symptoms ‐ average endpoint score (SANS, high score = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 5 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3a. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (SDS, high score = poor).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 5 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3a. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (SDS, high score = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 6 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3b. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (Ham‐D, high score = poor).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 6 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3b. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (Ham‐D, high score = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 7 Mental state: Specific ‐ 4. Anxiety ‐ average endpoint score (SAS, high score = poor).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 7 Mental state: Specific ‐ 4. Anxiety ‐ average endpoint score (SAS, high score = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 8 Leaving the study early.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 8 Leaving the study early.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 9 General functioning: Average endpoint score (GAF, high score = good).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 9 General functioning: Average endpoint score (GAF, high score = good).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 10 Social functioning: Average endpoint score (SDSI, high score = poor).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 10 Social functioning: Average endpoint score (SDSI, high score = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 11 Behaviour: 1. Positive behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 11 Behaviour: 1. Positive behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 12 Behaviour: 2. Negative behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 12 Behaviour: 2. Negative behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 13 Cognitive functioning: 1. Attention ‐ average endpoint score (PASAT, high score = good).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 13 Cognitive functioning: 1. Attention ‐ average endpoint score (PASAT, high score = good).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 14 Cognitive functioning: 2. Vigilance and attention ‐ average endpoint score (CCPT, high score = good).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.14

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 14 Cognitive functioning: 2. Vigilance and attention ‐ average endpoint score (CCPT, high score = good).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 15 Cognitive functioning: 3. Memory ‐ average endpoint score (WMS, high score = good).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.15

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 15 Cognitive functioning: 3. Memory ‐ average endpoint score (WMS, high score = good).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 16 Cognitive functioning: 4. Abstract thinking ‐ average endpoint score (BCST, high score = good) ).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.16

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 16 Cognitive functioning: 4. Abstract thinking ‐ average endpoint score (BCST, high score = good) ).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 17 Patient satisfaction: Average endpoint score (CSQ, high score = good).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.17

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 17 Patient satisfaction: Average endpoint score (CSQ, high score = good).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 18 Quality of life: Average endpoint score (SPG, high score = good).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.18

Comparison 1 Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months), Outcome 18 Quality of life: Average endpoint score (SPG, high score = good).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva
Summary of findings for the main comparison. MUSIC THERAPY versus STANDARD CARE for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia‐like disorders

MUSIC THERAPY versus STANDARD CARE for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia‐like disorders

Patient or population: people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia‐like disorders
Settings:
Intervention: MUSIC THERAPY versus STANDARD CARE

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Control

MUSIC THERAPY versus STANDARD CARE

Mental state: Negative symptoms
SANS
Follow‐up: 1‐3 months

The mean Mental state: Negative symptoms in the intervention groups was
0.74 standard deviations lower
(1 to 0.47 lower)

240
(4 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high1,2

SMD ‐0.74 (‐1 to ‐0.47)

Social functioning
SDSI
Follow‐up: 3 months

The mean Social functioning in the intervention groups was
0.78 standard deviations lower
(1.27 to 0.28 lower)

70
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high2,3

SMD ‐0.78 (‐1.27 to ‐0.28)

Global state: No clinically important overall improvement
as rated by trialists
Follow‐up: 3 months

Study population

RR 0.1
(0.03 to 0.31)

72
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high3,4

710 per 1000

71 per 1000
(21 to 220)

Medium risk population

710 per 1000

71 per 1000
(21 to 220)

General mental state
PANSS
Follow‐up: 3 months

The mean General mental state in the intervention groups was
0.36 standard deviations lower
(0.84 lower to 0.12 higher)

69
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high

SMD ‐0.36 (‐0.84 to 0.12)

General mental state
BPRS
Follow‐up: 1.5‐3 months

The mean General mental state in the intervention groups was
0.73 standard deviations lower
(1.16 to 0.31 lower)

100
(2 studies)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1,2,5

SMD ‐0.73 (‐1.16 to ‐0.31)

General functioning
GAF
Follow‐up: 3 months

The mean General functioning in the intervention groups was
0.05 standard deviations lower
(0.53 lower to 0.43 higher)

69
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate3

SMD ‐0.05 (‐0.53 to 0.43)

Quality of life
SPG
Follow‐up: 1 months

The mean Quality of life in the intervention groups was
0.05 standard deviations higher
(0.66 lower to 0.75 higher)

31
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate3

SMD 0.05 (‐0.66 to 0.75)

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio;

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 Limitations in the designs such as poorly reported randomisation and blinding, as well as less‐well defined music therapy.
2 The effect was in the large range according to Cohen 1988.
3 Imprecision ‐ only one study reported results on this outcome.
4 Very large effect based on direct evidence with no major threats to validity.
5 Inconsistency ‐ Heterogeneity between studies was high and significant.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. MUSIC THERAPY versus STANDARD CARE for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia‐like disorders
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Table 1. Music therapeutic approach: Further characteristics of included studies

No. of
sessions
(offered/
received)

Adequate
method

Adequate
training

Modality
(active/
receptive/
both)

Form of therapy

Therapy
process
(fixed
structure/
process‐
oriented)

Improvisation

Playing and/or singing pre‐
composed
music

Songwriting

Listening
to music

Verbal
discussion/reflection
of therapy process

Others

Ceccato 2009

Max. 16 (1/week over 4 months)

Yes

Yes

Receptive

No

No

No

Central

No

No

Fixed structure

He 2005

Max. 30
(5/week over 6 weeks)

Yes

Unclear

Receptive

No

No

No

Central

Yes

Dancing, reading poems with music background

Unclear

Li 2007

Max. 30
(5/week over 6 weeks)

Yes

Unclear

Receptive

No

No

No

Central

Yes

No

Unclear

Talwar 2006

Max. 12 sessions (1/week over 3 months)

Yes

Yes

Active

Central

Yes

No

No

Central

No

Process‐
oriented

Tang 1994

19 sessions received

Yes

Unclear

Both

Yes

Yes

No

Central

Yes

No

Fixed structure

Ulrich 2007

7.5 sessions received

Yes

Yes

Active

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Process‐
oriented

Wen 2005

Max. 30
(5/week over 6 weeks)

Yes

Unclear

Receptive

No

No

No

Central

Yes

Dancing

Unclear

Yang 1998

Max. 78 (6/week over 3 months)

Yes

Yes

Both

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Learning musicology

Unclear

Adequate music therapeutic method: A "yes" indicates that the method applied considered both musical experiences and relational aspects as dynamic forces of change in music therapy. A "no" indicates that relational aspects are missing.
Adequate music therapy training: A "yes" indicates that the persons conducting the music therapy have attended an appropriate music therapy training. A "no" indicates that the person conducting the music therapy had limited or even no music therapy training.

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Music therapeutic approach: Further characteristics of included studies
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 1. Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Global state: No clinically important overall improvement (as rated by trialists) Show forest plot

1

72

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [0.03, 0.31]

1.1 20 or more sessions

1

72

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [0.03, 0.31]

2 Mental state: General ‐ 1a. Average endpoint score (PANSS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.36 [‐0.84, 0.12]

2.1 less than 20 sessions

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.36 [‐0.84, 0.12]

3 Mental state: General ‐ 1b. Average endpoint score (BPRS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

2

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 20 or more sessions

2

100

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.73 [‐1.16, ‐0.31]

4 Mental state: Specific ‐ 2. Negative symptoms ‐ average endpoint score (SANS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

4

240

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.74 [‐1.00, ‐0.47]

4.1 less than 20 sessions

2

110

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.79 [‐1.19, ‐0.40]

4.2 20 or more sessions

2

130

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.69 [‐1.05, ‐0.33]

5 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3a. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (SDS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

2

90

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.63 [‐1.06, ‐0.21]

5.1 20 or more sessions

2

90

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.63 [‐1.06, ‐0.21]

6 Mental state: Specific ‐ 3b. Depression ‐ average endpoint score (Ham‐D, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

30

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.52 [‐1.25, 0.21]

6.1 20 or more sessions

1

30

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.52 [‐1.25, 0.21]

7 Mental state: Specific ‐ 4. Anxiety ‐ average endpoint score (SAS, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.61 [‐1.13, ‐0.09]

7.1 20 or more sessions

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.61 [‐1.13, ‐0.09]

8 Leaving the study early Show forest plot

8

493

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.38, 2.78]

8.1 less than 20 sessions

4

261

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.04 [0.36, 2.99]

8.2 20 or more sessions

4

232

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.06, 15.45]

9 General functioning: Average endpoint score (GAF, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.05 [‐0.53, 0.43]

9.1 less than 20 sessions

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.05 [‐0.53, 0.43]

10 Social functioning: Average endpoint score (SDSI, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

70

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.78 [‐1.27, ‐0.28]

10.1 20 or more sessions

1

70

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.78 [‐1.27, ‐0.28]

11 Behaviour: 1. Positive behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.24 [‐1.79, ‐0.68]

11.1 20 or more sessions

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.24 [‐1.79, ‐0.68]

12 Behaviour: 2. Negative behaviour ‐ average endpoint score (NOSIE, high score = poor) Show forest plot

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐2.22 [‐2.87, ‐1.57]

12.1 20 or more sessions

1

60

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐2.22 [‐2.87, ‐1.57]

13 Cognitive functioning: 1. Attention ‐ average endpoint score (PASAT, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.22, 1.21]

13.1 less than 20 sessions

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.22, 1.21]

14 Cognitive functioning: 2. Vigilance and attention ‐ average endpoint score (CCPT, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [‐0.23, 0.74]

14.1 less than 20 sessions

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.25 [‐0.23, 0.74]

15 Cognitive functioning: 3. Memory ‐ average endpoint score (WMS, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [‐0.06, 0.92]

15.1 less than 20 sessions

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.43 [‐0.06, 0.92]

16 Cognitive functioning: 4. Abstract thinking ‐ average endpoint score (BCST, high score = good) ) Show forest plot

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [‐0.39, 0.58]

16.1 less than 20 sessions

1

67

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.09 [‐0.39, 0.58]

17 Patient satisfaction: Average endpoint score (CSQ, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.32 [‐0.16, 0.80]

17.1 less than 20 sessions

1

69

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.32 [‐0.16, 0.80]

18 Quality of life: Average endpoint score (SPG, high score = good) Show forest plot

1

31

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.05 [‐0.66, 0.75]

18.1 less than 20 sessions

1

31

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.05 [‐0.66, 0.75]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Music therapy versus standard care (all outcomes short‐term ‐ 1 to 3 months)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión