Connecting Science and Practice in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services Research

2012 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 321-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Chambers ◽  
Beverly Pringle ◽  
Denise Juliano-Bult
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Adolescent Mental Health ◽  
Child And Adolescent ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Mental Health Services Research

scholarly journals Problems in Using Diagnosis in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services Research

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard Bickman ◽  
Lynne G. Wighton ◽  
E. Warren Lambert ◽  
Marc S. Karver ◽  
Lindsey Steding
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Service Use ◽  
Child And Adolescent ◽  
Diagnostic Interview ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Global Functioning ◽  
Mental Health Services Research

This paper presents results from a three-part study on diagnosis of children with affective and behavior disorders. We examined the reliability, discriminant, and predictive validity of common diagnoses used in mental health services research using a research diagnostic interview. Results suggest four problems: a) some diagnoses demonstrate internal consistency only slightly better than symptoms chosen at random; b) diagnosis did not add appreciably to a brief global functioning screen in predicting service use; c) low inter-rater reliability among informants and clinicians for six of the most common diagnoses; and d) clinician diagnoses differed between sites in ways that reflect different reimbursement strategies. The study concludes that clinicians and researchers should not assume diagnosis is a useful measure of child and adolescent problems and outcomes until there is more evidence supporting the validity of diagnosis.DOI:10.2458/azu_jmmss_v3i1_bickman

scholarly journals Problems in Using Diagnosis in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services Research

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard Bickman ◽  
Lynne G. Wighton ◽  
E. Warren Lambert ◽  
Marc S. Karver ◽  
Lindsey Steding
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Service Use ◽  
Child And Adolescent ◽  
Diagnostic Interview ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Global Functioning ◽  
Mental Health Services Research

This paper presents results from a three-part study on diagnosis of children with affective and behavior disorders. We examined the reliability, discriminant, and predictive validity of common diagnoses used in mental health services research using a research diagnostic interview. Results suggest four problems: a) some diagnoses demonstrate internal consistency only slightly better than symptoms chosen at random; b) diagnosis did not add appreciably to a brief global functioning screen in predicting service use; c) low inter-rater reliability among informants and clinicians for six of the most common diagnoses; and d) clinician diagnoses differed between sites in ways that reflect different reimbursement strategies. The study concludes that clinicians and researchers should not assume diagnosis is a useful measure of child and adolescent problems and outcomes until there is more evidence supporting the validity of diagnosis.DOI:10.2458/azu_jmmss_v3i1_bickman

Newcomers and Old Timers: An Erroneous Assumption in Mental Health Services Research

2019 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-473
Author(s):  
Carol S. Aneshensel ◽  
Jenna van Draanen ◽  
Helene Riess ◽  
Alice P. Villatoro
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Psychiatric Epidemiology ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Widespread Application ◽  
Mental Health Services Research ◽  
Homogeneity Assumption ◽  
Recent Treatment

Based on the premise that treatment changes people in ways that are consequential for subsequent treatment-seeking, we question the validity of an unrecognized and apparently inadvertent assumption in mental health services research conducted within a psychiatric epidemiology paradigm. This homogeneity assumption statistically constrains the effects of potential determinants of recent treatment to be identical for former patients and previously untreated persons by omitting treatment history or modeling only main effects. We test this assumption with data from the 2001–2003 Collaborative Psychiatric Epidemiology Surveys; the weighted pooled sample is representative of noninstitutionalized U.S. adults (18+; analytic n = 19,227). Contrary to the homogeneity assumption, some associations with recent treatment are conditional on past treatment, including psychiatric disorder and race-ethnicity—measures of need and treatment disparities, respectively. We conclude that the widespread application of the homogeneity assumption probably masks differences in the determinants of recent use between previously untreated persons and former patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document