Premium
Are important patient‐rated outcomes in community mental health care explained by only one factor?
Author(s) -
Hansson L.,
Björkman T.,
Priebe S.
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
acta psychiatrica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.849
H-Index - 146
eISSN - 1600-0447
pISSN - 0001-690X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2007.01005.x
Subject(s) - psychology , mental health , quality of life (healthcare) , clinical psychology , variance (accounting) , psychiatry , medicine , accounting , business , psychotherapist
The study tested whether four commonly used patient‐rated outcomes are explained by only one factor, reflecting a general appraisal tendency of patients. Method: Quality of life, needs and symptoms were rated by 92 patients in community mental health care at baseline and after 18 months and 6 years follow‐up periods. At follow ups treatment satisfaction was also assessed. Scores and change scores were subjected to factor analyses. We then tested which individual items predicted factor scores. Results: One factor explained between 55% and 66% of the variance of the tested patient‐rated outcomes cross‐sectionally and longitudinally. Only change scores of treatment satisfaction loaded on a separate factor. Seven items consistently explained more than 80% of the variance of the general factor. Conclusion: Four important patient‐rated outcomes are uniformly and substantially influenced by a general tendency for positive or negative appraisals. This tendency can be assessed more simply than using currently established methods.