Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33215190›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2021

Exploring the Development, Validity, and Utility of the Short-Form Version of the CHoice of Outcome In Cbt for PsychosEs: A Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Psychological Recovery.

Rebecca Webb, Gergely Bartl, Bryony James, Rosie Skan, Emmanuelle Peters, Anna-Marie Jones, Philippa Garety, Elizabeth Kuipers, Mark Hayward, Kathryn Greenwood

Open access · bronzeAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rebecca WebbSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Pevensey, Falmer, Brighton, UK.
Gergely BartlSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Pevensey, Falmer, Brighton, UK.
Bryony JamesSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Pevensey, Falmer, Brighton, UK.
Rosie SkanSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Pevensey, Falmer, Brighton, UK.
Emmanuelle PetersInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, King's College London, London, UK.
Anna-Marie JonesR&D Department, Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Brighton, UK.
Philippa GaretyInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, King's College London, London, UK.
Elizabeth KuipersInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, King's College London, London, UK.
Mark HaywardSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Pevensey, Falmer, Brighton, UK.
Kathryn GreenwoodSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Pevensey, Falmer, Brighton, UK.
University of Sussex · GBSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GBSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The original CHoice of Outcome In Cbt for psychosEs (CHOICE) measure was designed in collaboration with experts by experience as a patient-reported "Psychological Recovery" outcome measure for cognitive-behavioral therapy for psychosis (CBTp). A short version (CHOICE-SF) was developed to use as a brief outcome measure, with a focus on sensitivity to change, for use in future research and practice. CHOICE-SF was developed and validated using 3 separate samples, comprising 640 service users attending 1 of 2 transdiagnostic clinics for (1) CBTp or (2) therapies for voice hearing or (3) who took part in the treatment as usual arm of a trial. In the initial subsample of 69 participants, items from the original CHOICE measure with medium to large effect sizes for change pre- to post-CBTp were retained to form the CHOICE-SF. Internal consistency, construct validity, and sensitivity to change were confirmed, and the factor structure was examined in 242 participants. Specificity was confirmed by comparison with 44 participants who completed CHOICE at 2 time points but did not receive therapy. Validation of CHOICE-SF was carried out by confirming factor structure and sensitivity to change in a new sample of 354 and a subsample of 51 participants, respectively. The CHOICE-SF comprised 11 items and 1 additional personal goal item. A single-factor structure was confirmed, with high internal consistency, construct validity, and sensitivity to change. The CHOICE-SF is a brief, psychometrically robust measure to assess change following psychological therapies in research and clinical practice for people with psychosis and severe mental illness.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsPsychotic DisordersReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adultcognitive therapypatient-reported outcome measurementpsychological therapypsychosis

Identifiers

PMID33215190
PMCPMC8084424
OpenAlexW3100543661

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.