↓ Skip to main content

Standardization of health outcomes assessment for depression and anxiety: recommendations from the ICHOM Depression and Anxiety Working Group

Overview of attention for article published in Quality of Life Research, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
261 Mendeley
Title
Standardization of health outcomes assessment for depression and anxiety: recommendations from the ICHOM Depression and Anxiety Working Group
Published in
Quality of Life Research, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11136-017-1659-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander Obbarius, Lisa van Maasakkers, Lee Baer, David M. Clark, Anne G. Crocker, Edwin de Beurs, Paul M. G. Emmelkamp, Toshi A. Furukawa, Erik Hedman-Lagerlöf, Maria Kangas, Lucie Langford, Alain Lesage, Doris M. Mwesigire, Sandra Nolte, Vikram Patel, Paul A. Pilkonis, Harold A. Pincus, Roberta A. Reis, Graciela Rojas, Cathy Sherbourne, Dave Smithson, Caleb Stowell, Kelly Woolaway-Bickel, Matthias Rose

Abstract

National initiatives, such as the UK Improving Access to Psychological Therapies program (IAPT), demonstrate the feasibility of conducting empirical mental health assessments on a large scale, and similar initiatives exist in other countries. However, there is a lack of international consensus on which outcome domains are most salient to monitor treatment progress and how they should be measured. The aim of this project was to propose (1) an essential set of outcome domains relevant across countries and cultures, (2) a set of easily accessible patient-reported instruments, and (3) a psychometric approach to make scores from different instruments comparable. Twenty-four experts, including ten health outcomes researchers, ten clinical experts from all continents, two patient advocates, and two ICHOM coordinators worked for seven months in a consensus building exercise to develop recommendations based on existing evidence using a structured consensus-driven modified Delphi technique. The group proposes to combine an assessment of potential outcome predictors at baseline (47 items: demographics, functional, clinical status, etc.), with repeated assessments of disease-specific symptoms during the treatment process (19 items: symptoms, side effects, etc.), and a comprehensive annual assessment of broader treatment outcomes (45 items: remission, absenteeism, etc.). Further, it is suggested reporting disease-specific symptoms for depression and anxiety on a standardized metric to increase comparability with other legacy instruments. All recommended instruments are provided online ( www.ichom.org ). An international standard of health outcomes assessment has the potential to improve clinical decision making, enhance health care for the benefit of patients, and facilitate scientific knowledge.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 261 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 261 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 15%
Researcher 37 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 11%
Student > Bachelor 23 9%
Other 17 7%
Other 46 18%
Unknown 69 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 18%
Psychology 46 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 32 12%
Engineering 8 3%
Unspecified 7 3%
Other 45 17%
Unknown 77 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,299,574
of 23,390,392 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#154
of 2,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,481
of 318,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#4
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,390,392 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,939 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,636 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.