ArticleBMC psychiatry2024
Perspectives of people with schizophrenia on clinical outcome scales and patient-reported outcome measures: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term outcomes of assertive community treatment in Japan: 7-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.BMC psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Who Should Decide the Outcome for a Clinical Trial? Comparing the Views of Stakeholders on Intervention Benefit Using Multi-Criteria Decision Modelling of Cognitive Remediation.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2026Article
- Validity and reliability of the Japanese Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit four-level Self Completion Tool (ASCOT SCT4) in community mental health service users in Japan.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Article
- Ketogenic metabolic therapy as a candidate adjunct for CBTp delivery in schizophrenia spectrum disorders.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Development of Priority Outcome Domains for Community Mental Health Research via Consensus Among Multiple Stakeholders: Online Delphi Study in Japan.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver the past half-century, numerous scales have been designed to quantify outcomes in people with severe mental health disorders. However, little is known about the views of people diagnosed with schizophrenia on individual outcome scales, particularly outside of European countries.
aimWe conducted a qualitative study to examine the perspectives of people with schizophrenia on multiple scales in Japan.
methodsEleven participants took part in focus group interviews. Five had extensive experience as mental health peer supporters; the others had no such experience. To address potential power imbalances and facilitate dynamic discourse, participants were intentionally divided into two groups on the basis of peer support experience, and two simultaneous two-hour focus group interviews were conducted in separate rooms. The participants reviewed 12 clinical and patient-reported outcome measures and discussed their views on each measure. Interview data for each group were combined prior to analysis and qualitatively analyzed by four researchers using a thematic analysis approach.
resultsThe average age of the participants was 42.7 years (SD = 8.3), and six were male. On average, the participants had been living with schizophrenia for 22.2 years (SD = 11.1). After analyzing the interview data, the following five themes were identified, each containing two to seven subthemes: 1) validity and format of the scale construct, 2) factors affecting the accuracy of responses, 3) plain language and familiar words in Japanese culture, 4) psychological impact on the respondents, and 5) containing important items in everyday life.
conclusionThe participants provided both favorable and unfavorable feedback on each scale. When implementing research utilizing clinical outcome scales and patient-reported outcome measures, researchers should exercise caution considering the potential emotional impact on respondents. Furthermore, scale development should take into account the cultural background and psychological burden experienced by the respondents.
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.