Cargando…
Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018)
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 Ho...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9408525/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36011532 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19169895 |
_version_ | 1784774622546231296 |
---|---|
author | Harris, Meredith G. Tapp, Caley Arnautovska, Urska Coombs, Tim Dickson, Rosemary James, Mick Painter, Jon Smith, Mark Jury, Angela Lai, Jennifer Burgess, Philip M. |
author_facet | Harris, Meredith G. Tapp, Caley Arnautovska, Urska Coombs, Tim Dickson, Rosemary James, Mick Painter, Jon Smith, Mark Jury, Angela Lai, Jennifer Burgess, Philip M. |
author_sort | Harris, Meredith G. |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9408525 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94085252022-08-26 Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018) Harris, Meredith G. Tapp, Caley Arnautovska, Urska Coombs, Tim Dickson, Rosemary James, Mick Painter, Jon Smith, Mark Jury, Angela Lai, Jennifer Burgess, Philip M. Int J Environ Res Public Health Article 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. MDPI 2022-08-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9408525/ /pubmed/36011532 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19169895 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Harris, Meredith G. Tapp, Caley Arnautovska, Urska Coombs, Tim Dickson, Rosemary James, Mick Painter, Jon Smith, Mark Jury, Angela Lai, Jennifer Burgess, Philip M. Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018) |
title | Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018) |
title_full | Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018) |
title_fullStr | Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018) |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018) |
title_short | Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018) |
title_sort | assessing the content validity of the revised health of the nation outcome scales (honos 2018) |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9408525/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36011532 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19169895 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT harrismeredithg assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT tappcaley assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT arnautovskaurska assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT coombstim assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT dicksonrosemary assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT jamesmick assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT painterjon assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT smithmark assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT juryangela assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT laijennifer assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 AT burgessphilipm assessingthecontentvalidityoftherevisedhealthofthenationoutcomescaleshonos2018 |