• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Clearing Away the Smoke and Mirrors: Response to Dr O’Reilly

    Author(s)
    Kisely, Stephen
    Campbell, Leslie Anne
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Kisely, Steve R.
    Year published
    2006
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The arguments made by Dr O’Reilly are largely smoke and mirrors, with facts taken out of context to buttress his position. We are told that studies of CTOs have exceeded 4000 subjects, but Dr O’Reilly does not mention that only 416 subjects have completed RCTs. Dr O’Reilly also fails to men-tion that the benefits of CTOs largely disappear when people are compared with randomly or appropriately matched con-trol subjects. This finding includes preliminary results from Ontario comparing patients on ACT and CTOs with patients on ACT alone—results showing no additional benefit from CTOs (1). Regarding the assertion that CTOs ...
    View more >
    The arguments made by Dr O’Reilly are largely smoke and mirrors, with facts taken out of context to buttress his position. We are told that studies of CTOs have exceeded 4000 subjects, but Dr O’Reilly does not mention that only 416 subjects have completed RCTs. Dr O’Reilly also fails to men-tion that the benefits of CTOs largely disappear when people are compared with randomly or appropriately matched con-trol subjects. This finding includes preliminary results from Ontario comparing patients on ACT and CTOs with patients on ACT alone—results showing no additional benefit from CTOs (1). Regarding the assertion that CTOs improve com-pliance with follow-up, our initial argument also dealt with the fallacy of relying on outpatient contacts to evaluate CTOs. The NNT is useful in summarizing the effects of RCTs. Depending on how the NNT is calculated, it would take up to 100 CTOs to avoid a single admission and 500 to avoid an arrest, although these figures are lower, but still unacceptable, with intention-to-treat analyses (2).
    View less >
    Journal Title
    Canadian Journal of Psychiatry
    Volume
    51
    Issue
    11
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370605101103
    Subject
    Biomedical and clinical sciences
    Clinical sciences not elsewhere classified
    Psychology
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/29164
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E
    • TEQSA: PRV12076

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander