Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26912081›Full record

Trial reportBMC psychiatry2016

Accuracy of reported service use in a cohort of people who are chronically homeless and seriously mentally ill.

Julian M Somers, Akm Moniruzzaman, Lauren Currie, Stefanie N Rezansoff, Angela Russolillo, Milad Parpouchi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Identifying Cognitive Impairment in People Who Are Homeless in Metropolitan Australia: An Exploratory Study.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Julian M SomersSomers Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. jsomers@sfu.ca.
Akm MoniruzzamanSomers Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. akm_moniruzzaman@sfu.ca.
Lauren CurrieSomers Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. clauren@sfu.ca.
Stefanie N RezansoffSomers Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. sra20@sfu.ca.
Angela RussolilloSomers Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. angelarussolillo@gmail.com.
Milad ParpouchiSomers Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. spa16@sfu.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSelf-reported service use is an integral feature of interventional research with people who are homeless and mentally ill. The objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy of self-reported involvement with major categories of publicly funded services (health, justice, social welfare) within this sub-population.

methodsMeasures were administered pre-randomization in two randomized controlled trials, using timeline follow back with calendar aids for Health, Social, and Justice Service Use, compared to linked administrative data. Variables examined were: psychiatric admissions (both extended stays of more than 6 months and two or more stays within 5 years); emergency department visits, general hospitalization and jail in the past 6 months; and income assistance in the past 1 month. Participants (n = 433) met criteria for homelessness and a least one mental illness.

resultsPrevalence adjusted and bias adjusted kappa (PABAK) values ranged between moderate and almost perfect for extended psychiatric hospital separations (PABAK: 0.77; 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 0.71, 0.83), multiple psychiatric hospitalizations (PABAK = 0.50, 95 % CI = 0.41, 0.59), emergency department visits (PABAK: 0.77; 95 % CI = 0.71, 0.83), jail (PABAK: 0.74; 95 % CI = 0.68, 0.81), and income assistance (PABAK: 0.82; 95 % CI = 0.76, 0.87). Significant differences in under versus over reporting were also found.

conclusionsPeople who are homeless and mentally ill reliably reported their overall use of health, justice, and income assistance services. Evidence of under-reporting and over-reporting of certain variables has implications for specific research questions. ISRCTN registry: 57595077 (Vancouver at Home Study: Housing First plus Assertive Community Treatment versus congregate housing plus supports versus treatment as usual); and 66721740 (Vancouver at Home study: Housing First plus Intensive Case management versus treatment as usual).

Indexed as

AdultCanadaCohort StudiesCommunity Mental Health ServicesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHumansIll-Housed PersonsMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePersons with Psychiatric Disorders

Identifiers

PMID26912081
PMCPMC4766600

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.