Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25566099›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2014

Service user- and carer-reported measures of involvement in mental health care planning: methodological quality and acceptability to users.

Chris J Gibbons, Penny E Bee, Lauren Walker, Owen Price, Karina Lovell

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Chris J GibbonsManchester Centre for Health Psychology, School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester , Manchester , UK ; Centre for Primary Care, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester , Manchester , UK.
Penny E BeeSchool of Nursing Midwifery and Social Work, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester , Manchester , UK.
Lauren WalkerSchool of Nursing Midwifery and Social Work, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester , Manchester , UK.
Owen PriceSchool of Nursing Midwifery and Social Work, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester , Manchester , UK.
Karina LovellSchool of Nursing Midwifery and Social Work, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester , Manchester , UK ; NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care for Greater Manchester (NIHR CLAHRC-GM), University of Manchester , Manchester , UK.

Funding

Department of Health RP-DG-1209-10020Department of Health RP-PG-1210-12007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing service user and carer involvement in mental health care planning is a key healthcare priority but one that is difficult to achieve in practice. To better understand and measure user and carer involvement, it is crucial to have measurement questionnaires that are both psychometrically robust and acceptable to the end user.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review using the terms "care plan$," "mental health," "user perspective$," and "user participation" and their linguistic variants as search terms. Databases were searched from inception to November 2012, with an update search at the end of September 2014. We included any articles that described the development, validation or use of a user and/or carer-reported outcome measures of involvement in mental health care planning. We assessed the psychometric quality of each instrument using the "Evaluating the Measurement of Patient-Reported Outcomes" (EMPRO) criteria. Acceptability of each instrument was assessed using novel criteria developed in consultation with a mental health service user and carer consultation group.

resultsWe identified eleven papers describing the use, development, and/or validation of nine user/carer-reported outcome measures. Psychometric properties were sparsely reported and the questionnaires met few service user/carer-nominated attributes for acceptability. Where reported, basic psychometric statistics were of good quality, indicating that some measures may perform well if subjected to more rigorous psychometric tests. The majority were deemed to be too long for use in practice. DISCUSSION: Multiple instruments are available to measure user/carer involvement in mental health care planning but are either of poor quality or poorly described. Existing measures cannot be considered psychometrically robust by modern standards, and cannot currently be recommended for use. Our review has identified an important knowledge gap, and an urgent need to develop new user and carer measures of care-planning involvement.

Indexed as

carersinvolvementmental healthpatient-centered carequestionnairereview

Identifiers

PMID25566099
PMCPMC4263079

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.