ArticleThe British journal of clinical psychology2026
'We're not going to start lifting stones now…': Stakeholder perspectives on the role of psychometric methods in outcome measurement.
Article in The British journal of clinical psychology, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPsychological outcome measures guide research and clinical decision-making, yet many widely used tools were developed with limited psychometric rigour. Although advanced methods (e.g., item response theory, structural equation modelling) are now widely available, their added value in applied research remains uncertain and applied researcher perspective regarding such are unexplored. We aimed to address this gap in knowledge by examining key stakeholder perspective.
methodTo explore how these methods are perceived, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 stakeholders spanning psychometrics, clinical practice, applied research, statistics and academia. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsAnalysis identified three overarching themes: (1) growing recognition that heterogeneity in latent traits challenges assumptions underlying many measures, (2) the enduring use of entrenched but psychometrically weak tools and (3) nuanced views on when advanced methods meaningfully influence research findings. Participants acknowledged gaps in psychometric literacy and emphasised the need for more training and collaboration with psychometricians.
conclusionThese findings highlighted persistent limitations in measurement practice, clarify contexts where psychometric methods add genuine value, and point to opportunities for strengthening outcome measurement in psychology and psychiatry research.
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.