{"title":"个人安置和支持计划中独立审查员评分和自我评分的忠实度比较分析:重复横断面调查。","authors":"Sosei Yamaguchi, Junko Koike, Momoka Igarashi, Takayuki Kawaguchi, Takuma Shiozawa, Kaori Usui, Mai Iwanaga, Asami Matsunaga, Koji Yoshida, Sayaka Sato, Chiyo Fujii","doi":"10.1007/s10488-024-01413-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fidelity assessments can contribute to maintaining the adherence to the individual placement and support (IPS) model, which enhances vocational outcomes for individuals with mental illness worldwide. While independent reviews are standard, self-assessments could broaden the implementation of IPS. This study aimed to evaluate reviewer-rated and self-rated fidelity assessments using the Japanese version of the Individualized Supported Employment Fidelity Scale (JiSEF), and to compare the two assessment methods in terms of their correlations with employment outcomes in Japan. Over the 3-year research period, fidelity assessments were conducted by independent reviewers and trained program staff members across 26 programs, totaling 58 assessments. Analyses involved kappa statistics for item-level comparison, the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and paired t-test for the overall fidelity scores, and Pearson's correlations to examine the relationship between the fidelity scores and program-level employment outcomes. Most individual JiSEF items demonstrated fair to good reliability between reviewer-rated and self-rated assessments. The ICC for the overall JiSEF scores between the two assessment methods was 0.756, yet the distribution of self-rated scores was more scattered compared with that of reviewer-rated scores. The mean total scores from self-assessments were significantly lower than those from reviewer assessments (t = 2.072, P = 0.043). While both sets of scores correlated significantly with employment rates (r = 0.640, P < 0.001 for reviewer assessments; r = 0.325, P = 0.013 for self-assessments), the correlation was stronger for reviewer ratings (z = 2.207, P = 0.027). Self-rated fidelity assessments offer several benefits. However, since independent reviews had a more normal distribution and higher correlation with employment outcome, they should remain the priority in fidelity assessments within the Japanese IPS framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":7195,"journal":{"name":"Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Independent Reviewer-Rated and Self-Rated Fidelity Scores in Individual Placement and Support Programs: Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys.\",\"authors\":\"Sosei Yamaguchi, Junko Koike, Momoka Igarashi, Takayuki Kawaguchi, Takuma Shiozawa, Kaori Usui, Mai Iwanaga, Asami Matsunaga, Koji Yoshida, Sayaka Sato, Chiyo Fujii\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10488-024-01413-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Fidelity assessments can contribute to maintaining the adherence to the individual placement and support (IPS) model, which enhances vocational outcomes for individuals with mental illness worldwide. While independent reviews are standard, self-assessments could broaden the implementation of IPS. This study aimed to evaluate reviewer-rated and self-rated fidelity assessments using the Japanese version of the Individualized Supported Employment Fidelity Scale (JiSEF), and to compare the two assessment methods in terms of their correlations with employment outcomes in Japan. Over the 3-year research period, fidelity assessments were conducted by independent reviewers and trained program staff members across 26 programs, totaling 58 assessments. Analyses involved kappa statistics for item-level comparison, the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and paired t-test for the overall fidelity scores, and Pearson's correlations to examine the relationship between the fidelity scores and program-level employment outcomes. Most individual JiSEF items demonstrated fair to good reliability between reviewer-rated and self-rated assessments. The ICC for the overall JiSEF scores between the two assessment methods was 0.756, yet the distribution of self-rated scores was more scattered compared with that of reviewer-rated scores. The mean total scores from self-assessments were significantly lower than those from reviewer assessments (t = 2.072, P = 0.043). While both sets of scores correlated significantly with employment rates (r = 0.640, P < 0.001 for reviewer assessments; r = 0.325, P = 0.013 for self-assessments), the correlation was stronger for reviewer ratings (z = 2.207, P = 0.027). Self-rated fidelity assessments offer several benefits. However, since independent reviews had a more normal distribution and higher correlation with employment outcome, they should remain the priority in fidelity assessments within the Japanese IPS framework.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7195,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-024-01413-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-024-01413-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Analysis of Independent Reviewer-Rated and Self-Rated Fidelity Scores in Individual Placement and Support Programs: Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys.
Fidelity assessments can contribute to maintaining the adherence to the individual placement and support (IPS) model, which enhances vocational outcomes for individuals with mental illness worldwide. While independent reviews are standard, self-assessments could broaden the implementation of IPS. This study aimed to evaluate reviewer-rated and self-rated fidelity assessments using the Japanese version of the Individualized Supported Employment Fidelity Scale (JiSEF), and to compare the two assessment methods in terms of their correlations with employment outcomes in Japan. Over the 3-year research period, fidelity assessments were conducted by independent reviewers and trained program staff members across 26 programs, totaling 58 assessments. Analyses involved kappa statistics for item-level comparison, the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and paired t-test for the overall fidelity scores, and Pearson's correlations to examine the relationship between the fidelity scores and program-level employment outcomes. Most individual JiSEF items demonstrated fair to good reliability between reviewer-rated and self-rated assessments. The ICC for the overall JiSEF scores between the two assessment methods was 0.756, yet the distribution of self-rated scores was more scattered compared with that of reviewer-rated scores. The mean total scores from self-assessments were significantly lower than those from reviewer assessments (t = 2.072, P = 0.043). While both sets of scores correlated significantly with employment rates (r = 0.640, P < 0.001 for reviewer assessments; r = 0.325, P = 0.013 for self-assessments), the correlation was stronger for reviewer ratings (z = 2.207, P = 0.027). Self-rated fidelity assessments offer several benefits. However, since independent reviews had a more normal distribution and higher correlation with employment outcome, they should remain the priority in fidelity assessments within the Japanese IPS framework.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services is to improve mental health services through research. This journal primarily publishes peer-reviewed, original empirical research articles. The journal also welcomes systematic reviews. Please contact the editor if you have suggestions for special issues or sections focusing on important contemporary issues. The journal usually does not publish articles on drug or alcohol addiction unless it focuses on persons who are dually diagnosed. Manuscripts on children and adults are equally welcome. Topics for articles may include, but need not be limited to, effectiveness of services, measure development, economics of mental health services, managed mental health care, implementation of services, staffing, leadership, organizational relations and policy, and the like. Please review previously published articles for fit with our journal before submitting your manuscript.