| Title |
Feedback from Outcome Measures and Treatment Effectiveness, Treatment Efficiency, and Collaborative Practice: A Systematic Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10488-015-0710-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dawid Gondek, Julian Edbrooke-Childs, Elian Fink, Jessica Deighton, Miranda Wolpert |
| Abstract |
Due to recent increases in the use of feedback from outcome measures in mental health settings, we systematically reviewed evidence regarding the impact of feedback from outcome measures on treatment effectiveness, treatment efficiency, and collaborative practice. In over half of 32 studies reviewed, the feedback condition had significantly higher levels of treatment effectiveness on at least one treatment outcome variable. Feedback was particularly effective for not-on-track patients or when it was provided to both clinicians and patients. The findings for treatment efficiency and collaborative practice were less consistent. Given the heterogeneity of studies, more research is needed to determine when and for whom feedback is most effective. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 36% |
| Australia | 3 | 21% |
| United States | 2 | 14% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 21% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 57% |
| Scientists | 5 | 36% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 176 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 32 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 7% |
| Other | 34 | 19% |
| Unknown | 36 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 80 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 8% |
| Unknown | 41 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 28 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,308,392
of 25,758,211 outputs
Outputs from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#117
of 727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,925
of 402,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,758,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 727 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 402,245 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.