Reproducibility and responsiveness of evaluative outcome measures - Theoretical considerations illustrated by an empirical example

Objective: This article outlines basic methods for quantifying reproducibility and responsiveness of evaluative outcome measures. Methods: The background noise in stable patients provides the desired information to quantify the reproducibility. From this, the smallest real difference (SRD) for longitudinal differences can be derived. We propose to use the SRD to define responsiveness: from all patients who change according to an external criterion, we take the percentage that changes at least SRD on the outcome measure. A more complete picture of the responsiveness of the outcome measure arises when the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) is constructed, corresponding to all possible cut-off change scores. The proposed methods are illustrated with an empirical example. Results: In the illustration the methods appeared to be very useful and complemented each other. We could evaluate whether the observed change score was larger than that expected due to chance. With the methods it was possible to evaluate both the ability of an instrument to detect change if there is a real change in health status (sensitivity to change) and the ability to detect absence of change if there is no real change (specificity to change). Conclusion: We presented the use of SRDs and ROC curves for quantifying reproducibility and responsiveness. We started with the basic notions and arrived at methods that are both understandable and useful

Fatigue and psychosocial distress in the working population. Psychometrics, prevalence and correlates.

Objective: The purposes of this study were: (1) to explore the relationship between fatigue and psychological distress in the working population; (2) to examine associations with demographic and health factors; and (3) to determine the prevalence of fatigue and psychological distress. Methods: Data were taken from 12,095 employees. Fatigue was measured with the Checklist Individual Strength, and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) was used to measure psychological distress. Results: Fatigue was fairly well associated with psychological distress. A separation between fatigue items and GHQ items was shown. No clear, distinct pattern of associations was found for fatigue vs. psychological distress with respect to demographic factors. The prevalence was 22% for fatigue and 23% for psychological distress. Of the employees reporting fatigue, 43% had fatigue only, whereas 57% had fatigue and psychological distress. Conclusions: The results indicate that fatigue and psychological distress are common in the working population. Although closely associated, there is some evidence suggesting that fatigue and psychological distress are different conditions, which can be measured independently

Using Talking Mats to support conversations with communication vulnerable people: A scoping review

BACKGROUND:Talking Mats™ is a framework developed to support communication with communication vulnerable people. OBJECTIVE: The objective was twofold: to provide an overview of the objectives, target groups and settings for which Talking Mats has been used (Part 1), and an overview of empirical scientific knowledge on the use of Talking Mats (Part 2). METHODS: In this scoping review scientific and grey literature was searched in PubMed, Cinahl, Psycinfo, Google, and Google Scholar. Articles that described characteristics of Talking Mats or its use were included. For Part 2, additional selection criteria were applied to focus on empirical scientific knowledge. RESULTS: The search yielded 73 publications in Part 1, 12 of which were included in Part 2. Talking Mats was used for functional objectives (e.g. goal setting) and to improve communication and involvement. Part 2 showed that Talking Mats had positive influences on technical communication, effectiveness of conversations, and involvement and decision making in conversations. However, the level of research evidence is limited. CONCLUSIONS:Talking Mats can be used to support conversations between professionals and communication vulnerable people. More research is needed to study the views of people who are communication vulnerable and to study the effects of Talking Mats

Psychosocial interventions by general practitioners.

Contains fulltext : 52984.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Many patients visit their general practitioner (GP) because of problems that are psychosocial in origin. However, for many of these problems there is no evidence-based treatment available in primary care, and these patients place time-consuming demands on their GP. Therefore, GPs could benefit from tools to help these patients more effectively and efficiently. In this light, it is important to assess whether structured psychosocial interventions might be an appropriate tool for GPs. Previous reviews have shown that psychosocial interventions in primary care seem more effective than usual care. However, these interventions were mostly performed by health professionals other than the GP. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions by general practitioners by assessing the clinical outcomes and the methodological quality of selected studies. SEARCH STRATEGY: The search was conducted using the CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References on 20/10/2005, The Cochrane Library, reference lists of relevant studies for citation tracking and personal communication with experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and controlled patient preference trials addressing the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions by GPs for any problem or disorder. Studies published before November 2005 were eligible for entry. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Methodological quality was independently assessed by two review authors using the Maastricht-Amsterdam Criteria List. The qualitative and quantitative characteristics of selected trials were independently extracted by two review authors using a standardised data extraction form. Levels of evidence were used to determine the strength of the evidence available. Results from studies that reported similar interventions and outcome measures were meta-analysed. MAIN RESULTS: Ten studies were included in the review. Selected studies addressed different psychosocial interventions for five distinct disorders or health complaints. There is good evidence that problem-solving treatment by general practitioners is effective for major depression. The evidence concerning the remaining interventions for other health complaints (reattribution or cognitive behavioural group therapy for somatisation, cognitive behavioural therapy for unexplained fatigue, counselling for smoking cessation, behavioural interventions to reduce alcohol reduction) is either limited or conflicting. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In general, there is little available evidence on the use of psychosocial interventions by general practitioners. Of the psychosocial interventions reviewed, problem-solving treatment for depression may offer promise, although a stronger evidence-base is required and the effectiveness in routine practice remains to be demonstrated. More research is required to improve the evidence-base on this subject

The effectiveness of psychosocial interventions delivered by general practitioners.

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Many patients visit their general practitioner (GP) because of problems that are psychosocial in origin. However, for many of these problems there is no evidence-based treatment available in primary care, and these patients place time-consuming demands on their GP. Therefore, GPs could benefit from tools to help these patients more effectively and efficiently. In this light, it is important to assess whether structured psychosocial interventions might be an appropriate tool for GPs. Previous reviews have shown that psychosocial interventions in primary care seem more effective that usual care. However, these interventions were mostly performed by health professionals other than the GP. OBJECTIVES: To present a systematic review of the literature addressing the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions by general practitioners by assessing the clinical outcomes and the methodological quality of selected studies. SEARCH STRATEGY: The literature search was conducted using the CCDAN Trials Register, the Cochrane Library and reference lists of relevant studies for citation tracking. Also, personal communication with experts took place. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and controlled patient preference trials addressing the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions by GPs for any problem or disorder. Studies published before January 2002 were eligible for entry. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Methodological quality was independently be assessed by two reviewers using the Maastricht-Amsterdam Criteria List and the CCDAN Quality Rating Scale. The qualitative and quantitative characteristics of selected trials were independently extracted by two reviewers using a standardised data extraction form. Levels of evidence were used to determine the strength of the evidence available. Results from studies that reported similar interventions and outcome measures were meta-analysed. MAIN Results : Eight studies were included in the review. Selected studies addressed different psychosocial interventions for four distinct disorders or health complaints. There is good evidence that problem-solving treatment by general practitioners is effective for major depression. The evidence concerning the remaining interventions for other health complaints (reattribution or cognitive behavioural group therapy for somatisation, counselling for smoking cessation, behavioural interventions to reduce alcohol reduction) is either limited or conflicting. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: In general, there is little available evidence on the use of psychosocial interventions by general practitioners. Of the psychosocial interventions reviewed, problem-solving treatment for depression seems the most promising tool for GPs, although a stronger evidence-base is required and the effectiveness in routine practice remains to be demonstrated. More research is required to improve the evidence-base on this subject

Measurement of prolonged fatigue in the working population: determination of a cut-off point for the Checklist Individual Strength

Item does not contain fulltex