智障人士的成果测量:对有效工具的回顾和叙述性综述。

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Mrityunjai Kumar, Indermeet Sawhney, Verity Chester, Regi Alexander, James Mitchell, Rohit Shankar
{"title":"智障人士的成果测量:对有效工具的回顾和叙述性综述。","authors":"Mrityunjai Kumar, Indermeet Sawhney, Verity Chester, Regi Alexander, James Mitchell, Rohit Shankar","doi":"10.1177/00207640241291517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Outcome measurement is essential to determine the effectiveness of health interventions and improve the quality of services. The interplay of social, individual, and biological factors makes this a complex process in the psychiatry of people with intellectual disability (PwID).</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>Review of outcome measures which are validated in PwID.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A PRISMA-guided review was conducted, using a predefined criteria and a relevant word combination on four databases: EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Each included study was examined for relevance to intellectual disability psychiatry. The psychometric data of each tool was critically assessed. Findings were narratively synthesised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1,548 articles, 35 met the inclusion criteria. Several outcome measures were identified relevant to intellectual disability psychiatry, including tools for challenging/offending behavior, specific neurodevelopmental/clinical conditions such as ADHD, epilepsy, and dementia however, psychometric properties, validity and reliability varied considerably. The tools identified were largely clinician rated, with a dearth of measures suitable for completion by patients or their family carers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most outcome measures used for PwID lack suitable psychometric properties including validity or reliability for use within the ID population. Of importance, those with alternative expression or are non-verbal have been excluded from the research developing and reporting on measurement instruments. There is an underserved population who risk being left behind in the era of value-based medicine and increasing use of outcome measurement when assessing the effectiveness of healthcare interventions on individual and population levels. This is the first of its kind review in this area.</p>","PeriodicalId":14304,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"239-253"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11874570/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcome Measures in intellectual disability: A Review and narrative synthesis of validated instruments.\",\"authors\":\"Mrityunjai Kumar, Indermeet Sawhney, Verity Chester, Regi Alexander, James Mitchell, Rohit Shankar\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00207640241291517\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Outcome measurement is essential to determine the effectiveness of health interventions and improve the quality of services. The interplay of social, individual, and biological factors makes this a complex process in the psychiatry of people with intellectual disability (PwID).</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>Review of outcome measures which are validated in PwID.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A PRISMA-guided review was conducted, using a predefined criteria and a relevant word combination on four databases: EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Each included study was examined for relevance to intellectual disability psychiatry. The psychometric data of each tool was critically assessed. Findings were narratively synthesised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1,548 articles, 35 met the inclusion criteria. Several outcome measures were identified relevant to intellectual disability psychiatry, including tools for challenging/offending behavior, specific neurodevelopmental/clinical conditions such as ADHD, epilepsy, and dementia however, psychometric properties, validity and reliability varied considerably. The tools identified were largely clinician rated, with a dearth of measures suitable for completion by patients or their family carers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most outcome measures used for PwID lack suitable psychometric properties including validity or reliability for use within the ID population. Of importance, those with alternative expression or are non-verbal have been excluded from the research developing and reporting on measurement instruments. There is an underserved population who risk being left behind in the era of value-based medicine and increasing use of outcome measurement when assessing the effectiveness of healthcare interventions on individual and population levels. This is the first of its kind review in this area.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14304,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Social Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"239-253\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11874570/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Social Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640241291517\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640241291517","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:结果测量对于确定健康干预措施的有效性和提高服务质量至关重要。社会、个人和生物因素的相互作用使得智障人士(PwID)的精神病学研究过程非常复杂。目的:回顾在智障人士中得到验证的结果测量方法:方法:在 PRISMA 的指导下,使用预先定义的标准和相关词汇组合对四个数据库进行了审查:EMBASE、Medline、CINAHL 和 PsycINFO。对每项纳入的研究都进行了与智障精神病学相关性的审查。对每种工具的心理测量数据进行了严格评估。对研究结果进行了叙述性综合:在 1548 篇文章中,有 35 篇符合纳入标准。结果:在 1548 篇文章中,有 35 篇符合纳入标准,其中发现了几种与智障精神病学相关的结果测量方法,包括挑战/犯罪行为工具、特定神经发育/临床症状(如多动症、癫痫和痴呆症)工具,但是,这些工具的心理测量特性、有效性和可靠性存在很大差异。已确定的工具大多由临床医生评定,适合患者或其家庭照顾者完成的测量方法很少:结论:大多数用于智障人士的结果测量工具都缺乏适合智障人士使用的心理测量特性,包括有效性和可靠性。重要的是,那些有其他表达方式或不会说话的人被排除在测量工具的开发和报告研究之外。在以价值为基础的医疗时代,以及在评估个人和群体医疗保健干预措施的有效性时越来越多地使用结果测量的时代,这些未得到充分服务的人群有可能被抛在后面。本文是该领域的首篇同类综述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Outcome Measures in intellectual disability: A Review and narrative synthesis of validated instruments.

Background: Outcome measurement is essential to determine the effectiveness of health interventions and improve the quality of services. The interplay of social, individual, and biological factors makes this a complex process in the psychiatry of people with intellectual disability (PwID).

Aim: Review of outcome measures which are validated in PwID.

Methods: A PRISMA-guided review was conducted, using a predefined criteria and a relevant word combination on four databases: EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Each included study was examined for relevance to intellectual disability psychiatry. The psychometric data of each tool was critically assessed. Findings were narratively synthesised.

Results: Of 1,548 articles, 35 met the inclusion criteria. Several outcome measures were identified relevant to intellectual disability psychiatry, including tools for challenging/offending behavior, specific neurodevelopmental/clinical conditions such as ADHD, epilepsy, and dementia however, psychometric properties, validity and reliability varied considerably. The tools identified were largely clinician rated, with a dearth of measures suitable for completion by patients or their family carers.

Conclusion: Most outcome measures used for PwID lack suitable psychometric properties including validity or reliability for use within the ID population. Of importance, those with alternative expression or are non-verbal have been excluded from the research developing and reporting on measurement instruments. There is an underserved population who risk being left behind in the era of value-based medicine and increasing use of outcome measurement when assessing the effectiveness of healthcare interventions on individual and population levels. This is the first of its kind review in this area.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.30
自引率
1.30%
发文量
120
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Social Psychiatry, established in 1954, is a leading publication dedicated to the field of social psychiatry. It serves as a platform for the exchange of research findings and discussions on the influence of social, environmental, and cultural factors on mental health and well-being. The journal is particularly relevant to psychiatrists and multidisciplinary professionals globally who are interested in understanding the broader context of psychiatric disorders and their impact on individuals and communities. Social psychiatry, as a discipline, focuses on the origins and outcomes of mental health issues within a social framework, recognizing the interplay between societal structures and individual mental health. The journal draws connections with related fields such as social anthropology, cultural psychiatry, and sociology, and is influenced by the latest developments in these areas. The journal also places a special emphasis on fast-track publication for brief communications, ensuring that timely and significant research can be disseminated quickly. Additionally, it strives to reflect its international readership by publishing state-of-the-art reviews from various regions around the world, showcasing the diverse practices and perspectives within the psychiatric disciplines. This approach not only contributes to the scientific understanding of social psychiatry but also supports the global exchange of knowledge and best practices in mental health care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信