Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26466896›Full record

SynthesisBMC psychology2015

Measuring participation for persons with mental illness: a systematic review assessing relevance of existing scales for low and middle income countries.

Ganesh M Babulal, Parul Bakhshi, Sunyata Kopriva, Sarah A Ali, Susan A Goette, Jean-Francois Trani

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Ganesh M BabulalDepartment of Neurology, Washington University School of Medicine, Campus Box 8111, 4488 Forest Park, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA. babulalg@neuro.wustl.edu.
Parul BakhshiProgram in Occupational Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. bakship@wusm.wustl.edu.
Sunyata KoprivaBrown School of Social Work, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA. kopriva@wustl.edu.
Sarah A AliBrown School of Social Work, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA. l.aali89@gmail.com.
Susan A GoetteCultural Resources Consulting, Minneapolis, MN, USA. goett004@umn.edu.
Jean-Francois TraniBrown School of Social Work, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA. jtrani@brownschool.wustl.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundParticipation is increasingly becoming an important outcome for assessment in many fields, including development, disability and policy implementation. However, selecting specific instruments to measure participation has been a significant problem due to overlapping conceptual definitions and use of different theories. The objective of this paper is to identify participation instruments, examine theories/definition supporting their use and highlight scales for use in low and middle-income countries for persons with mental illness.

methodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify instruments intended to measure participation for individuals with severe mental illness. The search was limited to peer-reviewed articles published in English between 2003 and 2014. Instruments that measured related concepts of well-being, quality of life and social functioning were also identified and screened for items that pertained to participation, defined as empowerment and collective capabilities.

resultsFive scales met established criteria for assessing participation and were determined to contain questions measuring empowerment and/or collective capabilities. However, each scale largely assessed individual functioning and capacity, while neglecting collective aspects of the community. All scales were developed in high-income countries and none were used in low and middle-income countries.

conclusionsThere is an urgent need for participation scales to focus on empowerment as well as collective capabilities. Further, development of participation scales should clearly delineate theoretical foundations and concepts used. Finally, participation scales used in low and middle income countries should consider how contextual factors like medicine, poverty and disability, particularly with regards to mental illness, impact content of the scale.

Indexed as

Psychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsDeveloping CountriesHumansMental DisordersOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient ParticipationSelf EfficacySocial Adjustment

Identifiers

PMID26466896
PMCPMC4607168

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.