Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35586405›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022

Mood Disturbances Across the Continuum of Care Based on Self-Report and Clinician Rated Measures in the interRAI Suite of Assessment Instruments.

John P Hirdes, John N Morris, Christopher M Perlman, Margaret Saari, Gustavo S Betini, Manuel A Franco-Martin, Hein van Hout, Shannon L Stewart, Jason Ferris

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

John P HirdesSchool of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.
John N MorrisHebrew Senior Life, Boston, MA, United States.
Christopher M PerlmanSchool of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.
Margaret SaariSE Research Centre, SE Health and Lawrence S Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Gustavo S BetiniSchool of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.
Manuel A Franco-MartinSalamanca University and Zamora Hospital, Salamanca, Spain.
Hein van HoutDepartment of General Practice and Medicine for Older Persons, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Shannon L StewartFaculty of Education, Western University (Canada), London, ON, Canada.
Jason FerrisCentre for Health Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
University of Waterloo · CAHebrew College · USUniversity of Queensland · AUUniversity of Toronto · CAVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLWestern University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mood disturbance is a pervasive problem affecting persons of all ages in the general population and the subset of those receiving services from different health care providers. interRAI assessment instruments comprise an integrated health information system providing a common approach to comprehensive assessment of the strengths, preferences and needs of persons with complex needs across the continuum of care. Objective: Our objective was to create new mood scales for use with the full suite of interRAI assessments including a composite version with both clinician-rated and self-reported items as well as a self-report only version. Methods: We completed a cross-sectional analysis of 511,641 interRAI assessments of Canadian adults aged 18+ in community mental health, home care, community support services, nursing homes, palliative care, acute hospital, and general population surveys to develop, test, and refine new measures of mood disturbance that combined clinician and self-rated items. We examined validity and internal consistency across diverse care settings and populations. Results: The composite scale combining both clinician and self-report ratings and the self-report only variant showed different distributions across populations and settings with most severe signs of disturbed mood in community mental health settings and lowest severity in the general population prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The self-report and composite measures were strongly correlated with each other but differed most in populations with high rates of missing values for self-report due to cognitive impairment (e.g., nursing homes). Evidence of reliability was strong across care settings, as was convergent validity with respect to depression/mood disorder diagnoses, sleep disturbance, and self-harm indicators. In a general population survey, the correlation of the self-reported mood scale with Kessler-10 was 0.73. Conclusions: The new interRAI mood scales provide reliable and valid mental health measures that can be applied across diverse populations and care settings. Incorporating a person-centered approach to assessment, the composite scale considers the person's perspective and clinician views to provide a sensitive and robust measure that considers mood disturbances related to dysphoria, anxiety, and anhedonia.

Indexed as

continuum of careinterRAImood disturbancereliabilityscale developmentvalidity

Identifiers

PMID35586405
PMCPMC9108209
OpenAlexW4225264568

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.