A Review of Reviews of Patient-Reported Measures in Psychosis: Need to Consider Factors Affecting Equity and the Involvement of Patients.

Schizophrenia bulletin open Pub Date : 2025-01-11 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1093/schizbullopen/sgae032
Neha Nair, Maria Abou Farhat, Navdeep Kaur, Nev Jones, Greeshma Mohan, Jill Boruff, Srividya N Iyer
{"title":"A Review of Reviews of Patient-Reported Measures in Psychosis: Need to Consider Factors Affecting Equity and the Involvement of Patients.","authors":"Neha Nair, Maria Abou Farhat, Navdeep Kaur, Nev Jones, Greeshma Mohan, Jill Boruff, Srividya N Iyer","doi":"10.1093/schizbullopen/sgae032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient-reported measures are increasingly valued in psychosis care and research. For patient-reported measures to reflect patient perspectives, patients must be involved in developing them. Furthermore, their development and evaluation must consider sociodemographic characteristics influencing patient experiences and outcomes and measurement. As reviews reflect the state of the field and guide clinicians/researchers in selecting measures, our aim was to evaluate literature reviews of patient-reported measures on their consideration of factors affecting equity and patient involvement.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>For this review of reviews, we searched 3 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO) for reviews on patient-reported measures in psychosis. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, and descriptively synthesized and appraised the quality of included reviews. Using Cochrane's PROGRESS-Plus and a Canadian equity framework, reviews were evaluated on their consideration of sociodemographic characteristics, accessibility, and patient involvement.</p><p><strong>Study results: </strong>Of 10 reviews (6 systematic, 4 nonsystematic; 1111 studies; 313 measures), 6 limited their search to English. Barring 2 reviews that reported the age, gender, and countries of samples in included studies, the reviews did not extract/comment on population/sociodemographic characteristics. One commented on one measure's readability; none commented on the samples' literacy levels. Four reviews considered the availability of translations; only 1 evaluated cross-cultural validity. Only 2 considered the costs of measures. Only 1 evaluated patient involvement in developing patient-reported measures. One referenced equity frameworks/standards.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Reviews of patient-reported measures in psychosis demonstrate minimal attention to equity and patient involvement. We offer recommendations to strengthen patient-reported measures research by attending to equity, social determinants, and patient-centrism.</p>","PeriodicalId":94380,"journal":{"name":"Schizophrenia bulletin open","volume":"6 1","pages":"sgae032"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11920872/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schizophrenia bulletin open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/schizbullopen/sgae032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patient-reported measures are increasingly valued in psychosis care and research. For patient-reported measures to reflect patient perspectives, patients must be involved in developing them. Furthermore, their development and evaluation must consider sociodemographic characteristics influencing patient experiences and outcomes and measurement. As reviews reflect the state of the field and guide clinicians/researchers in selecting measures, our aim was to evaluate literature reviews of patient-reported measures on their consideration of factors affecting equity and patient involvement.

Study design: For this review of reviews, we searched 3 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO) for reviews on patient-reported measures in psychosis. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, and descriptively synthesized and appraised the quality of included reviews. Using Cochrane's PROGRESS-Plus and a Canadian equity framework, reviews were evaluated on their consideration of sociodemographic characteristics, accessibility, and patient involvement.

Study results: Of 10 reviews (6 systematic, 4 nonsystematic; 1111 studies; 313 measures), 6 limited their search to English. Barring 2 reviews that reported the age, gender, and countries of samples in included studies, the reviews did not extract/comment on population/sociodemographic characteristics. One commented on one measure's readability; none commented on the samples' literacy levels. Four reviews considered the availability of translations; only 1 evaluated cross-cultural validity. Only 2 considered the costs of measures. Only 1 evaluated patient involvement in developing patient-reported measures. One referenced equity frameworks/standards.

Conclusions: Reviews of patient-reported measures in psychosis demonstrate minimal attention to equity and patient involvement. We offer recommendations to strengthen patient-reported measures research by attending to equity, social determinants, and patient-centrism.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Real-life Affective Forecasting in Young Adults with High Social Anhedonia: An Experience Sampling Study. A Review of Reviews of Patient-Reported Measures in Psychosis: Need to Consider Factors Affecting Equity and the Involvement of Patients. Preferences for Selecting and Initiating Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Agents for the Treatment of Patients With Schizophrenia: Results From the US DECIDE Survey. The Startle Response and Prepulse Inhibition in Psychosis and Violence: A Combined Electromyography and Electroencephalography Study. Associations Between Klotho Levels, KL-VS Heterozygosity and Cognition in Schizophrenia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1