z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Assessment of Community Functioning in People With Schizophrenia and Other Severe Mental Illnesses: A White Paper Based on an NIMH-Sponsored Workshop
Author(s) -
A.S. Bellack,
M. F. Green,
Judith Α. Cook,
Wayne S. Fenton,
Philip D. Harvey,
Robert K. Heaton,
Thomas Laughren,
Andrew C. Leon,
Donna Jo Mayo,
Donald L. Patrick,
Tess Patterson,
Abigail K. Rose,
Ellen Stover,
Til Wykes
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
schizophrenia bulletin
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.823
H-Index - 190
eISSN - 1745-1707
pISSN - 0586-7614
DOI - 10.1093/schbul/sbl035
Subject(s) - workgroup , psychology , schizophrenia (object oriented programming) , psychological intervention , mental health , clinical trial , clinical psychology , psychiatry , applied psychology , medicine , computer network , pathology , computer science
People with schizophrenia frequently have significant problems in community functioning. Progress in developing effective interventions to ameliorate these problems has been slowed by the absence of reliable and valid measures that are suitable for use in clinical trials. The National Institute of Mental Health convened a workgroup in September 2005 to examine this issue and make recommendations to the field that would foster research in this area. This article reports on issues raised at the meeting. Many instruments have been developed to assess community functioning, but overall insufficient attention has been paid to psychometric issues and many instruments are not suitable for use in clinical trials. Consumer self-report, informant report, ratings by clinicians and trained raters, and behavioral assessment all can provide useful and valid information in some circumstances and may be practical for use in clinical trials. However, insufficient attention has been paid to when and how different forms of assessment and sources of information are useful or how to understand inconsistencies. A major limiting factor in development of reliable and valid instruments is failure to develop a suitable model of functioning and its primary mediators and moderators. Several examples that can guide thinking are presented. Finally, the field is limited by the absence of an objective gold standard of community functioning. Hence, outcomes must be evaluated in part by "clinical significance." This criterion is problematic because different observers and constituencies often have different opinions about what types of change are clinically important and how much change is significant.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom