SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Journal of Medical Quality
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kurland, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kurland, D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Reviews

A Review of Quality Evaluation Systems for Mental Health Services

David Kurland, M.D., S.M.

Harvard University School of Public Health, Center for Quality of Care Research and Education, Boston, Massachusetts

Mental health quality of care evaluation systems found in an extensive search are reviewed. The quality measures are differentiated from other seemingly simi lar types of scales and instruments. The quality systems are reviewed in reference to 1) reliability and validity of data, type, and source of data, allowance for patient variables, standards of quality, and other parameters and 2) range and comprehensiveness, particularly with regard to coverage of the range of disorders and condi tions, of age groups, care needs, care settings, treat ment modalities, and of types of provider performance. Most measures were reliable and valid. Some gave con sideration to patient variables and case mix, to timing, and to treatment intensity. There were no measures of providers' interpersonal performance. With regard to range and comprehensiveness, there was a substantial imbalance toward the medical model and pharmacother apy and away from systems orientation, from psycho therapy, and from other modalities, interventions, and types of programs.

American Journal of Medical Quality, Vol. 10, No. 3, 141-148 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/0885713X9501000306


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?




Advertisement