Measuring the sensitivity to change of the Role Functioning Scale through the utilization of the RCiD Index

International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 163-170

  Wieduwilt, Kristin M ^a   Jerrell, Jeanette M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical significance; Functioning assessment; Sensitivity to change; Severely mentally ill; Treatment effectiveness

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038172975     PISSN: 10498931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/mpr.46     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd edition, Revised). Washington DC: APA, 1987.
2. Christensen L, Mendoza, JL. A method of assessing change in a single subject: An alteration of the RC index. Behavior Therapy 1986; 17, 305-8
3. Goodman SH, Sewell DR, Cooley EL, Leavitt N. Assessing levels of adaptive functioning: The Role Functioning Scale. Community Mental Health Journal 1993; 29(2): 119-31.
4. Green RS, Gracely EJ. Selecting a rating scale for evaluating services to the chronically mentally ill. Community Mental Health Journal 1987; 23: 91-102.
5. Green RS, Jerrell JM. The generalizability of brief ratings of psychosocial functioning. Evaluation and Program Planning 1994; 17(2): 141-51.
6. Hageman WJJM, Arrindell WA. A further refinement of the reliable change (RC) index by improving the pre-post difference score: Introducing RCiD. Behavior Research and Therapy 1993; 31: 693-700.
7. Jacobson NS, Follette WC, Revenstorf D. Psychotherapy outcome research: methods for reporting variability and evaluating clinical significance. Behaviour Therapy 1984; 15: 336-52.
8. Jacobson NS, Truax P. Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1991; 59: 12-19.
9. Jerrell JM. Toward managed care for persons with severe mental illness: Implications from a cost-effectiveness study. Health Affairs 1995; 14(3): 197-207.
10. Kazdin AE. Assessing the clinical or applied importance of behavior change through social validation. Behavior Modification 1977; 1: 427-52.
11. Kazdin AE, Wilson GT. Evaluation of behaviour therapy: Issues, evidence, and research strategies. Cambridge MA: Ballinger, 1978.
12. Mavissakalian M. Clinically significant improvement in agoraphobia research. Behavior Research and Therapy 1986; 24: 369-70.
13. Nietzel MT, Trull TJ. Meta-analytic approaches to social comparisons: A method for measuring clinical significance. Behavioral Assessment 1988; 10: 146-59.
14. Schmidt-Posner J, Jerrell JM. Qualitative analysis of three care programs for the severely mentally ill. Community Mental Health Journal, 1998; 34: 381-92.
15. Speer DC. Clinically significant change: Jacobson and Truax (1991) revisited. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1991; 60: 402-8.
16. Van Oppen P, Emmelkamp PMG, Van Balkom AJLM, Van Dyck R. The sensitivity to change of measures for obsessive-compulsive disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 1995; 9(3): 241-8.
17. Wei L, Lachin J. Properties of the Urn randomization method in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1988; 9: 345-64.
18. Wolf MM. Social validity: the case for subjective measurement or how applied behaviour analysis is finding it heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1978; 11: 203-14.