How to assess the quality of psychotherapy outcome studies: A systematic review of quality assessment criteria.

OBJECTIVE: Although it is widely accepted that the quality of a study may affect its results, there is no agreed specific standard for assessing the quality of psychotherapy outcome studies. This study aims to review the existing variety of relevant quality assessment criteria. METHOD: We identified relevant quality measures based on a systematic literature search. To determine the specific relevance of the available quality criteria, we consulted experts in the field of psychotherapy outcome research. RESULTS: Nineteen different measures providing 185 different quality criteria were included. Four measures specifically focused psychotherapy studies, none of these were designed for studies without a control group. Experts did judge 20% of the items as "absolutely indispensable." CONCLUSIONS: Quality criteria that are exclusively related to the context of psychotherapy research are rare. Further research is required to examine the empirical relation between specific quality criteria and study results.

[Review Model for the Assessment of Psychometric Instruments--Recommendations of the German College of Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM)]. / Kriterienkatalog zur Beurteilung psychodiagnostischer Selbstbeurteilungsinstrumente--Empfehlung des Deutschen Kollegiums für Psychosomatische Medizin (DKPM).

OBJECTIVES: Psychometric instruments are commonly applied in psychotherapeutic research and care for the baseline assessment of symptoms, the planning of therapeutic interventions, the assessment of the longitudinal course of symptoms and outcomes of therapeutic interventions as well as quality management of care. Psychometric properties as well as economic aspects should be considered in the selection of specific instruments. It is assumed that users of psychometric instruments face a great variety of instruments and related information. For that reason, it seems challenging to absorb the current knowledge and to integrate it into clinical practice and research. Thus, it is likely that well-known, established and easily accessible instruments are commonly used, while new developed instruments might not be disseminated in research and healthcare. METHODS: Based on available international review models, the working group "Psychometrics and Psychodiagnostics" of the German College of Psychosomatic Medicine (DKPM) has developed and tested a review model specifically tailored for psychotherapeutic research and care. RESULTS: The different steps of development, as well as the final review model based on the consensus of the working group are presented. The review model contains 6 generic terms (reliability, validity, objectivity, reference groups and aspects of application) with 21 different criteria to be assessed with 0-3 asterisks (*). The criteria are clearly operationalized and the practical use of the review model is explained and discussed. CONCLUSIONS: With the review model for the assessment of psychometric instruments a well-defined evaluation system is made available for research and clinical practice which has been developed by an expert group. The review model facilitates systematic, transparent and comparative evaluation of psychometric instruments along clearly defined criteria. It also supports the selection of psychometric instruments in research and care. Next, the working group aims at disseminating and implementing the review model as well as the application and publication of reviews for different psychometric instruments based on the review model.

[Psychometric analysis of the Turkish speaking version of the "Hamburg Modules for the Assessment of Psychosocial Health" (T-HEALTH-49)]. / Psychometrische Überprüfung der türkischsprachigen Version der "Hamburger Module zur Erfassung allgemeiner Aspekte psychosozialer Gesundheit" (T-HEALTH-49).

Based on the German original questionnaire of the "Hamburger modules for measuring generic aspects of psycho-social health in the therapeutic practice" (HEALTH-49) a Turkish speaking version (T-HEALTH-49) was cross-cultural sensitively developed. The psychometric properties have been analysed by means of a clinical sample of Turkish speaking patients (N=311). The questionnaire proves to be practical, the dimensional structure and the relatively independence of the modules have been confirmed by factor analysis. The single scales are characterised by satisfactory to high reliability and satisfactory validity. The T-HEALTH-49 considers adequately psychosocial aspects in diagnostic, therapy planning and quality assurance. The questionnaire can be downloaded for free (www.hamburger-module.de).

The validity of the German version of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS-D): a clinician-rating for the differential assessment of the severity of mental disorders.

The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) is an internationally-established clinician-rating instrument for the differential assessment of the severity of patients with mental disorders. The aim of this study was to examine the validity of the German version of the HoNOS (HoNOS-D). Evaluation of validity, including factor validity, convergent and discriminant validity and sensitivity to change, was conducted on a large, virtually representative, clinical sample of patients with mental disorders in inpatient psychotherapy (Study 1, N = 3169). Additional assessment of criterion-based validity was completed using another clinical sample of patients with mental disorders (Study 2, N = 55). Although factor validity of the HoNOS-D and its total score could not be confirmed as expected, the majority of single items of the HoNOS-D proved to be valid in terms of convergent validity, criterion-based validity and sensitivity to change. Hence, single items, rather than the total score of the HoNOS-D, can be recommended for obtaining a picture of the impairment of patients with mental disorders in the clinical setting.

[Psychometric analysis of a short form of the "Hamburg Modules for the Assessment of Psychosocial Health" (HEALTH-49)]. / Psychometrische Uberprüfung einer verkürzten Version der "Hamburger Module zur Erfassung allgemeiner Aspekte psychosozialer Gesundheit für die therapeutische Praxis" (HEALTH-49).

OBJECTIVES: The HEALTH questionnaire, which originally consisted of 79 items, aims to assess generic aspects of psychosocial health. METHODS: Based on large clinical and healthy samples (n = 1548 psychotherapy inpatients, n = 5630 primary-care patients), the questionnaire was shortened and psychometrically analyzed. RESULTS: The resulting 49-item questionnaire ("HEALTH-49") comprises six discrete modules with nine scales (somatoform complaints, depressiveness, phobic anxiety, psychological wellbeing, interactional problems, self-efficacy, activity and participation, social support, and social stress). It proves to be well accepted and feasible under routine conditions. Factor analyses confirm the intended dimensional configuration and the relative independence of modules. The scales reveal high reliability. Evidence of their validity and sensitivity to change are demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: The HEALTH-49 is a self-rating instrument that allows for the comprehensive and economic assessment of generic aspects of psychosocial health. It is highly suitable for use in clinical practice. The questionnaire is available as a free download from http://www.hamburger-module.de/