Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42832104›Full record

ArticleAdministration and policy in mental health2026

Mental Health in Regularly Collected Nationally Representative U.S. Surveys: What's Measured and What's Missing?

Phillip M Hughes, Genevieve Graaf, Kristin H Gigli, Jennifer Murphy, Bethany Wood, Kathleen C Thomas

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Administration and policy in mental health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Phillip M HughesSchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Binghamton University, Binghamton, USA. phughes2@binghamton.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5472-1677
Genevieve GraafSchool of Social Work, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3767-5939
Kristin H GigliCollege of Nursing and Health Innovation, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, USA.
Jennifer MurphySchool of Social Work, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, USA.
Bethany WoodSchool of Social Work, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1367-0508
Kathleen C ThomasEshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1611-5393

Funding

National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health 1K01MH129991
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To document the availability and quality of mental health measures in regularly collected national surveys in the United States. We conducted a review of the mental health measures included in eight publicly available health-focused recurring surveys capable of producing nationally-representative estimates. For each measure, we documented the constructs measured, number of items in the measure, the populations for whom the measure is collected, and the years in which the measure was collected. We examined peer-reviewed literature for psychometric properties of the measures. U.S. national surveys vary substantially in their measurement of mental health constructs in terms of the number of constructs (3-15), measure complexity (1 item - 233 items), populations covered, years administered, and the proportion of constructs that have validated measures (0%-100%). The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey offered the best mix of mental health measures (9; 56% validated), years covered (1996-Present), and related health information; however, each of the surveys offered distinct advantages in terms of the geographic information available (e.g., national, state, census tract), populations covered (e.g., children, teens, and/or adults) and measured mental health constructs (conditions, the impact of those conditions, and mental health service use). Mental health is measured in various ways across the nationally-representative surveys, with each survey offering distinct advantages and disadvantages. Mental health researchers should consider these differences when using national survey data. Future research should attempt to validate the mental health measures used in these surveys and efforts should be made to address existing gaps in measurement.

Indexed as

MeasurementMental healthReviewSurveys

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.