Chapter 5 122 high-fidelity and control groups at post-treatment (B = 0.08, p = 0.46) or at followup (B = 0.16, p=0.08). Moreover, there were no statistically significant differences in improvement between the moderate fidelity and control groups at posttreatment (B = 0.06, p = 0.48); however, at follow-up, we did observe a statistically significant between group difference in overall improvement (B = 0.20, p = 0.04) (Table 4). Regarding the fixed coefficients for the SERS-SF score, the high-fidelity subgroup showed a statistically significant improvement as compared with the control group at posttreatment (B = 7.22, p = 0.04) but not at follow-up (B = 4.96, p = 0.19). At post-treatment, the moderate fidelity subgroup did not improve at the level of statistical significance as compared with the control group (B = 2.65, p = 0.53); however, there was a statistically significant improvement at follow-up (B = 9.06, p = 0.01) (Table 5). IMR Completion Analysis of overall illness management in completers using the client version of the IMR scale revealed a greater effect than that observed in the intention-to-treat analysis (p = 0.016), with small and moderate effect sizes at T2 and T3, respectively (for all outcomes for completers, see Tables 6, 7). Unlike analysis with the intentionto-treat principle, completer analysis within the clinician version of the IMR scale revealed a statistically significant result (p = 0.012), with large and moderate effect sizes at T2 and T3, respectively. For IMR completers, there were no effects on the five measured illness management components. With respect to self-esteem, similar to the findings of the intention-to-treat analysis IMR completers showed statistically significant improvement as compared with the control group (p = 0.03) with moderate effect sizes at T2 and T3. Unlike in the intention-to-treat analysis, IMR completers showed a statistically significant improvement in overall personal recovery measured via the MHRM (p = 0.03), with small effect sizes at T2 and T3 (for all statistically significant outcomes at 18 months, see Figure 3). For IMR completers, there was no effect on self-stigma. Further, similar to the intention-to-treat analysis, IMR completion did not show effects on clinical and functional recovery. The possibility of selective IMR non-completion was explored using 12 baseline characteristics. It was found that selective non-completion of IMR was unlikely, as suggested by multivariate logistic regression analysis (omnibus test: χ2 (13) = 11.64, p = 0.56); Supplementary Table 1).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw