Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35007807›Full record

ReviewJournal of psychiatric research2022

A systematic search and critical review of studies evaluating psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for schizophrenia.

Benjamin Buck, Emily C Gagen, Tate F Halverson, Arundati Nagendra, Kelsey A Ludwig, John C Fortney

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of psychiatric research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Methodological quality of 100 recent systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments: an overview of reviews.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Review
  6. Review
  7. 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.

Benjamin BuckBehavioral Research in Technology and Engineering (BRiTE) Center, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: buckbe@uw.edu.
Emily C GagenDepartment of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Massachusetts Mental Health Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Tate F HalversonDurham VA Health Care System, Durham, NC, USA.
Arundati NagendraDepartment of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Kelsey A LudwigDurham VA Health Care System, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill - Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
John C FortneyDivision of Population Health, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, USA; VA Puget Sound Health Services Research & Development, Denver-Seattle Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered Value-Driven Care, USA.

Funding

User-centered design of a mobile health intervention to promote help-seeking and reduce duration of untreated illness among young adults with early psychosisK23MH122504 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BUCK, BENJAMIN EDWARDS · 2020 to 2024
$930k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH122504
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Measurement-based care (MBC) involves the regular administration of outcome assessments to track and evaluate treatment progress and requires psychometrically sound instruments. While there are widely used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for several psychiatric disorders and symptom categories (e.g., depression, anxiety), there is less consensus about self-report assessments for measurement-based care of schizophrenia. The present review provides an initial guide to this area by reporting on psychometric studies that introduce or evaluate PROMs designed for the ongoing treatment of schizophrenia. Out of an initial database of 6,153 articles, and review of 141 full-text articles, an analysis of 21 articles examining 12 measures is presented in this review. Findings suggest robust options exist for clinical and research institutions aiming to assess symptom outcomes in schizophrenia, with most measures showing strengths in internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and a number of measures with evidence of convergent or criterion validity. While there exist heterogeneous options, multiple measures demonstrated promising psychometric strengths. Future work validating consistent psychometric validity could involve measures which could be valuable in context of MBC for schizophrenia.

Indexed as

SchizophreniaHumansPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSelf ReportMeasurement-based carePatient-reported outcome measuresPsychometricsSchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID35007807
PMCPMC8882143

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.