Evaluating and quantifying user and carer involvement in mental health care planning (EQUIP): Co-development of a new patient-reported outcome measure

PLoS ONE

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2016, Pages

  Bee, Penny ^a   Gibbons, Chris ^b,c   Callaghan, Patrick ^d   Fraser, Claire ^a   Lovell, Karina ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MENTAL HEALTH CARE; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RASCH ANALYSIS; SCIENTIST; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; CAREGIVER; FACTOR ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; REPRODUCIBILITY;

CAREGIVERS; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HEALTH PLANNING; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES; PATIENT OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84962532843     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149973     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. SocSci Med. 2000;7:1087-1110.
2. Makoul G, Clayman M. An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters. Patient EducCouns. 2006;60:301-312. PMID: 16051459
3. Hickey G, Kipping C. Exploring the concept of user involvement in mental health through a participation continuum. J Clin Nurs. 1998;7:83-88. PMID: 9510712
4. Porter M, Teisberg E. Redefining health care: creating value-based competition on results [Internet]. 2006. Available: https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Kp5fCkAzzS8C&oi=fnd&pg= PR10&dq=What+is+value+in+health+care%3F+&ots=VZt5PealaA&sig=4cUln6tCpKX-qwBiyXZ4 mI9NIE
5. Wolpert M. Do patient reported outcome measures do more harm than good? BMJ. 2013;346.
6. Department of Health. Effective Care Co-ordination in Mental Health Services: Modernising the Care Programme Approach. 1999.
7. Care Quality Commission. Survey of Mental Health Inpatient Services. 2009.
8. Healthcare Commission. The pathway to recovery: a review of NHS acute inpatient mental health services. Healthcare Commission. London; 2008.
9. Her Majesty's Government. No health without mental health: a cross-goverment mental health outcomes strategy for people of all ages. London; 2011.
10. Department of Health. Refocusing the Care Programme Approach. Policy and Positive Practice Guidance. 2008.
11. Bee P, Playle J, Lovell K, Barnes P, Gray R, Keeley P. Service user views and expectations of UK-registered mental health nurses: a systematic review of empirical research. Int J Nurs Stud. 2008;45:442-57. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.02.008 PMID: 17418194
12. Bee P, Price O, Baker J, Lovell K. Looking beyond the rhetoric-a systematic synthesis of barriers and facilitators to user-led care planning. Br J Psychiatry. 2014; In Press.
13. Gibbons CJ, Bee PE, Walker L, Price O, Lovell K. Service user- and carer-reported measures of involvement in mental health care planning: methodological quality and acceptability to users. Front psychiatry. 2014;5:178. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2014.00178 PMID: 25566099
14. Hudon C, Fortin M, Haggerty J, Lambert M, Poitras M. Measuring Patients' Perceptions of Patient-Centered Care: A Systematic Review of Tools for Family Medicine, Ann Fam Med, 2011, 9(2):155-164. doi: 10.1370/afm.1226 PMID: 21403143
15. Munro K, Ross KM, Reid M. User involvement in mental health: time to face up the challenges of meaningful involvement. Int J Ment Health Promot 2006, 8:37-44
16. Stevens S. On the theory of scales of measurement. 1946;103:677-680.
17. Rocha Nda. An introduction to Rasch analysis for psychiatric practice and research. J Psychiatr 2013;47:141-148.
18. Merbitz C, Morris J, Grip J. Ordinal scales and foundations of misinference. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989;70:308-312. PMID: 2535599
19. Jr ES. Evidence forthe reliability of measures and validity of measure interpretation: a Rasch measurement perspective. J Appl Meas. 2001;2:281-311. PMID: 12011511
20. Willis G. Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications; 2004.
21. Tennant A, Pallant J. Unidimensionality matters! (Ataleof two Smiths?). Rasch Meas Trans. 2006;20:1048-1051.
22. Guilleux A, Blanchin M, Hardouin J-B, Sébille V. Power and sample size determination in the Rasch model: evaluation of the robustness of a numerical method to non-normality of the latent trait. PLoS One. 2014;9:e83652. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083652 PMID: 24427276
23. Linacre J. Sample size and item calibration stability. 1994;7:328.
24. Revelle W, Rocklin T. Very Simple Structure: An Alternative Procedure For Estimating The Optimal Number Of Interpretable Factors. Multivariate Behav Res. 2010;14:403-414.
25. Van Schuur WH. Mokken Scale Analysis: Between the Guttman Scale and Parametric Item Response Theory. PolitAnal. 2003;11:139-163. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpg002
26. Schuur W van. Ordinal item response theory: Mokken scale analysis [Internet]. 2011. Available: https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=8Igk82X-xIC&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=Ordinal+Item +Response+Theory:+Mokken+Scale+Analysis&ots=7T4ImyLkfU&sig=K8ZYlzdb HnBhAKSEqGdaoJk244
27. Bond T. Too many factors in Factor Analysis? Rasch Meas Trans. 1994;8:347.
28. Revelle W. psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research. Northwest Univ Evanston R Packag version. 2014; Available: https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=psych%3A +Procedures+for+Personality+and+Psychological+Research&btnG=&as sdt=1%2C5&as sdtp=
29. Fox J. polycor: Polychoricand Polyserial Correlations. (Version R package version 0.7-8.) [Internet]. 2010. Available: http://cran. r-project.org/package=polycor
30. Mokken RJ. A Theory and Procedure of Scale Analysis: With Applications in Political Research [Internet]. Walter de Gruyter; 1971. Available: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id= vAumIrkzYj8C&pgis=1
31. Sijtsma K, Molenaar II W. Introduction to nonparametric item response theory. London: Sage Publications; 2002; Available: http://www.narcis.nl/publication/RecordID/oai:wo.uvt.nl:89846
32. Rasch G. Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research; 1960.
33. Karabatsos G. The Rasch model, additive conjoint measurement, and new models of probabilistic measurement theory. J Appl Meas. 2001;2:389-423. PMID: 12011506
34. Gibbons CJ, Mills RJ, Thornton EW, Ealing J, Mitchell JD, Shaw PJ, et al. Development of a patient reported outcome measure for fatigue in motor neurone disease: the Neurological Fatigue Index (NFI-MND). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011;9:101. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-9-101 PMID: 22107756
35. Prieto L, Alonso J, Lamarca R. Classical Test Theory versus Rasch analysis for quality of life questionnaire reduction. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:27. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-1-27 PMID: 12952544
36. Karabatsos G. Comparing the aberrant response detection performance of thirty-six person-fit statistics. Appl Meas Educ. 2003;16:277-298.
37. Gibbons C, Kenning C, Coventry P, Bee P. Development of a multimorbidity illness perceptions scale (MULTIPleS). PLoSOne. 2013;8:e81852. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081852 PMID: 24376504
38. Pallant J, Tennant A. An introduction to the Rasch measurement model: an example using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Br J Clin Psychol. 2007;46:1-18. PMID: 17472198
39. Holland P, Wainer H. Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.; 2012.
40. Linacre J. Category, step and threshold: definitions & disordering. Rasch Meas Trans. 2001; Available: https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=Category%2C+Step+and+Threshold%3A+Definitions+ %26+Disordering&btnG=&as sdt=1%2C5&as sdtp=
41. Linacre JM. Category Disordering (disordered categories) vs. Threshold Disordering (disordered thresholds). Rasch Meas Trans. 1999;13:675.
42. Wright B. Raw Scores Are Not Linear Measures:: Rasch vs. Classical Test Theory Comparison. Rasch Meas Trans. 1992;6.
43. Gibbons CJ, Mills RJ, Thornton EW, Ealing J, Mitchell JD, Shaw PJ, et al. Rasch analysis of the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) for use in motor neurone disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011;9:82. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-9-82 PMID: 21955749
44. Sideridis GD. The Effects of Local Item Dependence on Estimates of Ability in the Rasch Model. Rasch Meas Trans. 2011;25:1334-6.
45. Fisher WJ. Reliability, Separation, Strata Statistics. Rasch Meas Trans. 1992;6:238.
46. Corporation IBM. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.; 2013.
47. Ark L Van der. Mokken scale analysis in R. J StatSoftw. 2007;20:1-19. Available: http://www.jstatsoft.org/v20/a11/paper
48. Ark L Van der. New developments in Mokken scale analysis in R. J StatSoftw. 2012; Available: http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i05/paper
49. RDC Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. [Internet]. Vienna, Austria; Available: http://www.r-project.org
50. Andrich D, Sheridan B, Luo G. Rasch models for measurement: RUMM2030. Perth, Western Australia: RUMM Pty Ltd.; 2010.