“There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatment

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Alves, Paula Cristina Gomes
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Sales, Célia Maria Dias, Ashworth, Mark, Faisca, Luis
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/14749
Resumo: There has been an increasing call for service users to be more actively involved with the evaluation of treatment outcomes. One strategy to impove such involvement is to ask service users to contribute with their own criteria for evaluation by sharing their personal story and perspective about their clinical situation. In this cross-sectional study, we contrasted the contents elicited by service users completing two individualised measures against the contents of three widely used standardised measures. We also compared two methods to generate individualised data using self-report and interview-based instruments (PSYCHLOPS and PQ). Following a thematic comparison approach, we found that one quarter of the problems reported by patients in individualised measures were not covered by any of our standardised comparators. Also, half of our sample generated at least one problem whose theme was not covered by any of the three standardised measures. We also found that patients in this population have many other concerns beyond drug use. These included psychological (e.g. interpersonal relationships) and socio-economic (e.g. money) problems, which were frequently reported. Our study suggests that listening to service users’ stories allows us to capture issues of importance to service users in substance use treatment, which may be underestimated by standardised measures.
id RCAP_69712cd41a21283db0d223a3234fecd1
oai_identifier_str oai:sapientia.ualg.pt:10400.1/14749
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling “There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatmentSubstance use treatment evaluationSubstance use treatment evaluationPersonalised assessmentStandardised measuresIndividualised measuresThere has been an increasing call for service users to be more actively involved with the evaluation of treatment outcomes. One strategy to impove such involvement is to ask service users to contribute with their own criteria for evaluation by sharing their personal story and perspective about their clinical situation. In this cross-sectional study, we contrasted the contents elicited by service users completing two individualised measures against the contents of three widely used standardised measures. We also compared two methods to generate individualised data using self-report and interview-based instruments (PSYCHLOPS and PQ). Following a thematic comparison approach, we found that one quarter of the problems reported by patients in individualised measures were not covered by any of our standardised comparators. Also, half of our sample generated at least one problem whose theme was not covered by any of the three standardised measures. We also found that patients in this population have many other concerns beyond drug use. These included psychological (e.g. interpersonal relationships) and socio-economic (e.g. money) problems, which were frequently reported. Our study suggests that listening to service users’ stories allows us to capture issues of importance to service users in substance use treatment, which may be underestimated by standardised measures.POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007294SpringerSapientiaAlves, Paula Cristina GomesSales, Célia Maria DiasAshworth, MarkFaisca, Luis2020-09-28T09:07:52Z20182018-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/14749eng1557-187410.1007/s11469-018-9985-6info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-07-24T10:27:05Zoai:sapientia.ualg.pt:10400.1/14749Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T20:05:43.780045Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv “There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatment
title “There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatment
spellingShingle “There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatment
Alves, Paula Cristina Gomes
Substance use treatment evaluation
Substance use treatment evaluation
Personalised assessment
Standardised measures
Individualised measures
title_short “There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatment
title_full “There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatment
title_fullStr “There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatment
title_full_unstemmed “There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatment
title_sort “There are things I want to say but you do not ask”: a comparison between standardised and individualised evaluations in substance use treatment
author Alves, Paula Cristina Gomes
author_facet Alves, Paula Cristina Gomes
Sales, Célia Maria Dias
Ashworth, Mark
Faisca, Luis
author_role author
author2 Sales, Célia Maria Dias
Ashworth, Mark
Faisca, Luis
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Sapientia
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Alves, Paula Cristina Gomes
Sales, Célia Maria Dias
Ashworth, Mark
Faisca, Luis
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Substance use treatment evaluation
Substance use treatment evaluation
Personalised assessment
Standardised measures
Individualised measures
topic Substance use treatment evaluation
Substance use treatment evaluation
Personalised assessment
Standardised measures
Individualised measures
description There has been an increasing call for service users to be more actively involved with the evaluation of treatment outcomes. One strategy to impove such involvement is to ask service users to contribute with their own criteria for evaluation by sharing their personal story and perspective about their clinical situation. In this cross-sectional study, we contrasted the contents elicited by service users completing two individualised measures against the contents of three widely used standardised measures. We also compared two methods to generate individualised data using self-report and interview-based instruments (PSYCHLOPS and PQ). Following a thematic comparison approach, we found that one quarter of the problems reported by patients in individualised measures were not covered by any of our standardised comparators. Also, half of our sample generated at least one problem whose theme was not covered by any of the three standardised measures. We also found that patients in this population have many other concerns beyond drug use. These included psychological (e.g. interpersonal relationships) and socio-economic (e.g. money) problems, which were frequently reported. Our study suggests that listening to service users’ stories allows us to capture issues of importance to service users in substance use treatment, which may be underestimated by standardised measures.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018
2018-01-01T00:00:00Z
2020-09-28T09:07:52Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/14749
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/14749
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 1557-1874
10.1007/s11469-018-9985-6
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799133296972529664