A Validation and Replication Study of the Patient-Generated Measure PSYCHLOPS on an Icelandic Clinical Population

Héðinsson, Helgi; Kristjánsdóttir, Hafrún; Ólason, Daníel Þór; Sigurðsson, Jón Friðrik

doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000136

Cited by 25 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Assessment judgements about one individual are based on comparison with other persons (clinical and non‐clinical populations) answering the same standardized items. However, by being designed with reference to the whole population, nomothetic PROMS probably under‐report individual‐specific problems presented by patients, and may contain items of little personal significance . Extensive research and clinical practice have shown that there are significant between‐person differences in behaviour disorders (eg Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM‐5), which cannot be captured by the nomothetic approach.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capturing and missing the patient's story through outcome measures: A thematic comparison of patient‐generated items in PSYCHLOPS with CORE‐OM and PHQ‐9

Sales

Neves

Alves

et al. 2017

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThere is increasing interest in individualized patient‐reported outcome measures (I‐PROMS), where patients themselves indicate the specific problems they want to address in therapy and these problems are used as items within the outcome measurement tool.ObjectiveThis paper examined the extent to which 279 items reported in an I‐PROM (PSYCHLOPS) added qualitative information which was not captured by two well‐established outcome measures (CORE‐OM and PHQ‐9).DesignComparison of items was only conducted for patients scoring above the “caseness” threshold on the standardized measures.Setting and patients107 patients were participating in therapy within addiction and general psychiatric clinical settings.Main resultsAlmost every patient (95%) reported at least one item whose content was not covered by PHQ‐9, and 71% reported at least one item not covered by CORE‐OM.DiscussionResults demonstrate the relevance of individualized outcome assessment for capturing data describing the issues of greatest concern to patients, as nomothetic measures do not always seem to capture the whole story.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capturing and missing the patient's story through outcome measures: A thematic comparison of patient‐generated items in PSYCHLOPS with CORE‐OM and PHQ‐9

Sales

Neves

Alves

et al. 2017

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…PM+ integrates problem-solving and behavioural treatment techniques that demonstrate amenability to lowintensity delivery and are evidence-based [42][43][44][45]. gPM+ is delivered over 5 weekly sessions of 120 min duration.…”

Section: Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group problem management plus (gPM+) in the treatment of common mental disorders in Syrian refugees in a Jordanian camp: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Accessing quality mental health care poses significant challenges for persons affected by adversity, especially in low-and middle-income countries where resources are scarce. To mitigate this, the World Health Organization has developed group problem management plus (gPM+), a low-intensity psychological intervention for adults experiencing psychological distress. gPM+ is a group-based intervention consisting of five-sessions, and can be delivered by non-specialist providers. This paper outlines the study protocol for a trial of gPM+ in Jordan. Methods: We will conduct a single-blind, two-arm, randomized controlled trial in a Syrian refugee camp in Jordan. We aim to enrol 480 adults into the trial. Participants will be eligible for the trial if they screen positive for levels of psychological distress. Following screening, those eligible will be randomly assigned to receive the gPM+ intervention or enhanced treatment as usual. The primary outcome is reduction in levels of psychological distress at 3-months post-treatment. Secondary outcomes include anxiety, depression, prodromal psychotic symptoms, posttraumatic stress disorder, prolonged grief, daily functioning, economic effectiveness, and change in parenting behaviour. Secondary outcomes also include the reduction in psychological distress of the participant's child. Discussion: The trial aims to deliver a template for affordable and scalable psychosocial interventions that can readily be implemented in refugee settings, and that can benefit both the participant and their child. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12619001386123. Registered prospectively on 10/10/2019.

show abstract

“…includes an overall evaluation question (determining self-rated outcome ranging from 'much better' to 'much worse') in relation to the identified problem. PSYCHLOPS has been validated in primary care populations across several countries (29,30).…”

Section: Secondary Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of adding a psychological intervention to routine care of common mental disorders in a specialized mental healthcare facility in Pakistan: a randomized controlled trial

Hamdani

Huma

Masood

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In many low resource settings, the provision of government mental health care services is limited to specialized psychiatry units in urban hospital care facilities, where the most common treatment for common mental disorders (CMDs) is pharmacotherapy, occasionally with adjunct nonspecific psychological support. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of adding a low intensity, psychological intervention, Problem Management Plus (PM+) for CMDs into routine care in a specialized mental health care facility in Pakistan. Methods A two arm, single-blind individual randomized controlled trial (RCT) was carried out with adults (N=192), referred for psychological support by psychiatrists. The study participants were randomized (1:1) to PM+ plus Treatment as Usual (TAU) (n = 96) or TAU only (n = 96). The primary outcomes were symptoms of anxiety and depression, measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and functional impairment as measured by WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS-12) at 20-weeks after baseline. Results The analysis was done on intention-to-treat principle. The linear mixed model analysis showed that at 20-weeks after baseline, there was a significant reduction in symptoms of anxiety and depression (mean [SD], 16.23 [8.81] vs 19.79 [7.77]; AMD, -3.10; 95% CI, −0.26 to −5.76); p =0.03 and improvement in functioning (mean [SD], 22.94 [9.37] vs 27.37 [8.36]; AMD, -4.35; 95% CI, -1.45 to -7.24); p =0.004 in PM+ plus TAU versus TAU group. The follow-up rate was 67% at primary end-point. Conclusions Specialized care facilities in LMICs may consider adding brief, evidence-based psychological treatments for CMDs to their routine care.

show abstract

A Validation and Replication Study of the Patient-Generated Measure PSYCHLOPS on an Icelandic Clinical Population

Cited by 25 publications

References 23 publications

Capturing and missing the patient's story through outcome measures: A thematic comparison of patient‐generated items in PSYCHLOPS with CORE‐OM and PHQ‐9

Capturing and missing the patient's story through outcome measures: A thematic comparison of patient‐generated items in PSYCHLOPS with CORE‐OM and PHQ‐9

Group problem management plus (gPM+) in the treatment of common mental disorders in Syrian refugees in a Jordanian camp: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Effect of adding a psychological intervention to routine care of common mental disorders in a specialized mental healthcare facility in Pakistan: a randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About