Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29678991›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Measurement properties of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) family of measures: protocol for a systematic review.

Meredith G Harris, Claudia Sparti, Roman Scheurer, Tim Coombs, Jane Pirkis, Torleif Ruud, Steve Kisely, Ketil Hanssen-Bauer, Johan Siqveland, Philip M Burgess

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Meredith G HarrisSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Claudia SpartiSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Roman ScheurerSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Tim CoombsIllawarra Institute for Mental Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.
Jane PirkisCentre for Mental Health, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Torleif RuudDivision of Mental Health Services, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
Steve KiselySchool of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Ketil Hanssen-BauerDivision of Mental Health Services, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
Johan SiqvelandDivision of Mental Health Services, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
Philip M BurgessSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) for adults, and equivalent measures for children and adolescents and older people, are widely used in clinical practice and research contexts to measure mental health and functional outcomes. Additional HoNOS measures have been developed for special populations and applications. Stakeholders require synthesised information about the measurement properties of these measures to assess whether they are fit for use with intended service settings and populations and to establish performance benchmarks. This planned systematic review will critically appraise evidence on the measurement properties of the HoNOS family of measures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Journal articles meeting inclusion criteria will be identified via a search of seven electronic databases: MEDLINE via EBSCOhost, PsycINFO via APA PsycNET, Embase via Elsevier, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature via EBSCOhost, Web of Science via Thomson Reuters, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library. Variants of 'Health of the Nation Outcome Scales' or 'HoNOS' will be searched as text words. No restrictions will be placed on setting or language of publication. Reference lists of relevant studies and reviews will be scanned for additional eligible studies. Appraisal of reliability, validity, responsiveness and interpretability will be guided by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist. Feasibility/utility will be appraised using definitions and criteria derived from previous reviews. For reliability studies, we will also apply the Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies to assess quality of reporting. Results will be synthesised narratively, separately for each measure, and by subgroup (eg, treatment setting, rater profession/experience or training) where possible. Meta-analyses will be undertaken where data are adequate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required as no primary data will be collected. Outcomes will be disseminated to stakeholders via reports, journal articles and presentations at meetings and conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017057871.

Indexed as

Health Status IndicatorsChecklistClinical ProtocolsHealthy People ProgramsHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicOutcome Assessment, Health CarePublic HealthReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as Topicmeasurement propertiesmental health servicesmeta-analysisoutcome measuressystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29678991
PMCPMC5914766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.