ArticlePsychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)2025
A Patient-Centered Outcomes Framework for Evaluating Behavioral Health Crisis Care.
Article in Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveRecent federal investments have accelerated a nationwide transformation of the behavioral health crisis care (BHCC) system, raising pertinent questions about quality and effectiveness. In response to calls to collect more data and define outcomes for assessing BHCC, this study sought to identify patient-centered outcomes (PCOs) from the perspectives of individuals with lived experience of a behavioral disorder and individuals who have delivered BHCC services.
methodsVia a multiphased recruitment approach, qualitative interviews were conducted with 120 stakeholders: peers with lived experience (N=21), direct-service providers (N=47), program directors and managers (N=44), and executive leaders (N=8). All interview transcripts were analyzed by using an open coding approach to generate emerging themes that captured measurable components of BHCC and outcomes of interest meaningful to stakeholders.
resultsA PCO framework for evaluating BHCC was developed by mapping emerging themes to a conceptual framework adapted from Donabedian's structure-process-outcome model. Forty-five themes were identified and grouped under five domains: system structure, system implementation, system use, social outcomes, and health outcomes.
conclusionsAlthough further efforts are needed to engage patients and providers in the process of developing specific measures, this framework provides a starting point for PCO research on BHCC.
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.