ArticleCommunity mental health journal2007
The Hoosier Assurance Plan Instrument for Adults (HAPI-A): the psychometric properties of a level of functioning assessment instrument designed for use in a state managed care mental health program.
Article in Community mental health journal, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Field test of the feasibility and validity of using the Hoosier Assurance Plan Instrument for Adults in a state mental health program.Community mental health journal · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The psychometric properties of the HAPI-A were examined at intake and 90-day follow-up in consumers with mental illness (MI) or chronic addiction (CA) being served at one of 11 treatment facilities (n = 1168). A 4-factor subscale structure was confirmed and factor invariance tests indicated a single model for the CA and MI samples. Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability were good (ICCs = 0.72-0.88). Factor scores correlated with GAF ratings and predicted membership in severity/cost groupings proposed for setting reimbursement rates. Sensitivity to change was confirmed for all four factors for the CA sample and for three of four factors for the MI sample.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17624615What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.