Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018).
content validity
measurement properties
mental health services
routine outcome measurement
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 08 2022
11 08 2022
Historique:
received:
30
06
2022
revised:
27
07
2022
accepted:
30
07
2022
entrez:
26
8
2022
pubmed:
27
8
2022
medline:
30
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) comprises 12 scales that cover the kinds of problems that may be experienced by working-age adults in contact with specialised mental health services. Drawing on 20 years' experience in clinical practice, a collaborative, international review of the HoNOS was undertaken and a revised measure (known as the HoNOS 2018) was published. In this study, 32 experts from Australia, England and New Zealand completed an anonymous web-based survey to assess the relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility (aspects of content validity) of the HoNOS 2018. The experts rated 11 of the 12 HoNOS 2018 scales as 'important' or 'very important' for determining the overall clinical severity (item-level content validity index or I-CVI ≥ 0.75). Evaluations of the scales' ability to capture change, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility were more variable, but generally positive. Experts' comments provided further insights into this variability; for example, they noted that some scales combine multiple phenomena, which can result in ambiguity in item wording and assessment challenges. Results from this study suggest that the revisions have not altered the importance of the scales. Given the measure's breadth of content, training remains important for ensuring rating fidelity. Inter-rater reliability and utility testing are indicated.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36011532
pii: ijerph19169895
doi: 10.3390/ijerph19169895
pmc: PMC9408525
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Lancet Psychiatry. 2019 Aug;6(8):675-712
pubmed: 31324560
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2015;27(4):329-37
pubmed: 25800080
BJPsych Bull. 2018 Apr;42(2):63-68
pubmed: 29502543
Value Health. 2017 Jan;20(1):2-14
pubmed: 28212963
Res Nurs Health. 1997 Jun;20(3):269-74
pubmed: 9179180
JAMA Psychiatry. 2019 Jan 1;76(1):96-98
pubmed: 30476934
Qual Life Res. 2018 May;27(5):1159-1170
pubmed: 29550964
Br J Psychiatry. 1998 Jan;172:11-8
pubmed: 9534825
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005 Nov 28;3:76
pubmed: 16313678
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2015;27(4):306-19
pubmed: 25832566
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2015;27(4):338-44
pubmed: 26256034
Br J Psychiatry. 2002 Jul;181:1-2
pubmed: 12091254
Br J Psychiatry. 1999 May;174:409-12
pubmed: 10616606
BJPsych Bull. 2017 Jun;41(3):172-176
pubmed: 28584656
Australas Psychiatry. 2020 Apr;28(2):206-209
pubmed: 31564114
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019 Feb;15(2):214-221
pubmed: 29606610
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2015;27(4):286-95
pubmed: 25738745
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):967-77
pubmed: 22152165
Res Nurs Health. 2007 Aug;30(4):459-67
pubmed: 17654487
Qual Health Care. 2000 Jun;9(2):98-105
pubmed: 11067258
J Behav Health Serv Res. 2003 Oct-Dec;30(4):393-405
pubmed: 14593663
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 May 22;12:96
pubmed: 22506982
Australas Psychiatry. 2009 Apr;17(2):141-8
pubmed: 19016362
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):978-88
pubmed: 22152166
Br J Psychiatry. 2002 Feb;180:101-3
pubmed: 11823316
Aust Health Rev. 2013 Jun;37(3):375-80
pubmed: 23601621
Res Nurs Health. 2006 Oct;29(5):489-97
pubmed: 16977646
Nurs Res. 1986 Nov-Dec;35(6):382-5
pubmed: 3640358
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2015;27(4):276-85
pubmed: 25832565
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2012 Jan;51(1):63-8
pubmed: 22330870
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2015;27(4):264-75
pubmed: 25768326
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Dec 3;20(1):293
pubmed: 33267819
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2015;27(4):320-8
pubmed: 26107997