ReviewEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2022
Magnitude of terminological bias in international health services research: a disambiguation analysis in mental health.
Review in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structuring Digital Mental Health Care Navigation: Co-Design Nominal Group Technique Study to Develop the MChart Definition and Typology of the Characteristics of Digital Mental Health Care Navigation Tools.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- A shared terminology for implementation research impact: Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF) Glossary.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- A taxonomy of the process in implementation science: the Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF).Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Valuing impact: Estimating return on investment of mental health and wellbeing projects for veterans and first responders.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Modelling the impact on a local mental health system of previously implemented care programs: the experience of assertive outreach teams in Bizkaia (Spain).Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2025Article
- Validation of the PECUNIA reference unit costs templates in Spain: a useful tool for multi-national economic evaluations of health technologies.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2024Article
- Mental Health Care Navigation Tools in Australia: Infoveillance Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- The Development of a New Approach for the Harmonized Multi-Sectoral and Multi-Country Cost Valuation of Services: The PECUNIA Reference Unit Cost (RUC) Templates.Applied health economics and health policy · 2024Article
- Review
- Evaluating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social and Emotional Wellbeing services: A collective case study in Far North Queensland.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2024Article
- Clarifying terminology and definitions in education services for mental health users: A disambiguation study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Impact of the workforce allocation on the technical performance of mental health services: the collective case of Helsinki-Uusimaa (Finland).Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- Patterns of mental health care provision in urban areas: A comparative analysis for local policy in the ACT.PloS one · 2023Article
- Unit Costs in Health Economic Evaluations: Quo Vadis, Austria?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- In Search for Comparability: The PECUNIA Reference Unit Costs for Health and Social Care Services in Europe.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsHealth services research (HSR) is affected by a widespread problem related to service terminology including non-commensurability (using different units of analysis for comparisons) and terminological unclarity due to ambiguity and vagueness of terms. The aim of this study was to identify the magnitude of the terminological bias in health and social services research and health economics by applying an international classification system.
methodsThis study, that was part of the PECUNIA project, followed an ontoterminology approach (disambiguation of technical and scientific terms using a taxonomy and a glossary of terms). A listing of 56 types of health and social services relevant for mental health was compiled from a systematic review of the literature and feedback provided by 29 experts in six European countries. The disambiguation of terms was performed using an ontology-based classification of services (Description and Evaluation of Services and DirectoriEs - DESDE), and its glossary of terms. The analysis focused on the commensurability and the clarity of definitions according to the reference classification system. Interrater reliability was analysed using
resultsThe disambiguation revealed that only 13 terms (23%) of the 56 services selected were accurate. Six terms (11%) were confusing as they did not correspond to services as defined in the reference classification system (non-commensurability bias), 27 (48%) did not include a clear definition of the target population for which the service was intended, and the definition of types of services was unclear in 59% of the terms: 15 were ambiguous and 11 vague. The
conclusionsService terminology is a source of systematic bias in health service research, and certainly in mental healthcare. The magnitude of the problem is substantial. This finding has major implications for the international comparability of resource use in health economics, quality and equality research. The approach presented in this paper contributes to minimise differentiation between services by taking into account key features such as target population, care setting, main activities and type and number of professionals among others. This approach also contributes to support financial incentives for effective health promotion and disease prevention. A detailed analysis of services in terms of cost measurement for economic evaluations reveals the necessity and usefulness of defining services using a coding system and taxonomical criteria rather than by 'text-based descriptions'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.