Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are widely used for evaluating the care of patients with psychosis. Previous studies have reported a considerable overlap in the information captured by measures designed to assess different outcomes. This may impair the validity of PROs and makes an a priori choice of the most appropriate measure difficult when assessing treatment benefits for patients. We aimed to investigate the extent to which four widely established PROs [subjective quality of life (SQOL), needs for care, treatment satisfaction and the therapeutic relationship] provide distinct information independent from this overlap. METHOD: Analyses, based on item response modelling, were conducted on measures of SQOL, needs for care, treatment satisfaction and the therapeutic relationship in two large samples of patients with psychosis. RESULTS: In both samples, a bifactor model matched the data best, suggesting sufficiently strong concept factors to allow for four distinct PRO scales. These were independent from overlap across measures due to a general appraisal tendency of patients for positive or negative ratings and shared domain content. The overlap partially impaired the ability of items to discriminate precisely between patients from lower and higher PRO levels. We found that widely used sum scores were strongly affected by the general appraisal tendency. CONCLUSIONS: Four widely established PROs can provide distinct information independent from overlap across measures. The findings may inform the use and further development of PROs in the evaluation of treatments for psychosis.

Original publication

DOI

10.1017/S0033291710000784

Type

Journal article

Journal

Psychol Med

Publication Date

02/2011

Volume

41

Pages

277 - 289

Keywords

Adult, Community Mental Health Services, England, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Outcome Assessment (Health Care), Patient Satisfaction, Psychotic Disorders, Quality of Life, Reproducibility of Results, Schizophrenia