CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48Psychiatric care and mental health servicesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingReliability and Agreement in Measurement

A psychometric evaluation of the German version of the ‘health of the nation outcome scales, HoNOS-D’: On the feasibility and reliability of clinician-performed measurements of severity in patients with mental disorders

Andreas, Sylke, Harfst, Timo, Dirmaier, Jörg, Kawski, Stephan, Koch, Uwe, Schulz, Holger·2007·Psychopathology
DOI 10.1159/000098492
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The assessment of the severity of a mental illness is a central component in the treatment of patients with mental disorders in both the in- and outpatient settings. In Great Britain, the 'Health of the Nation Outcome Scales, HoNOS' were developed to assess the health and social functioning of patients with mental disorders. AIMS: To examine the psychometric properties, especially the feasibility and reliability, of a German version of the HoNOS (HoNOS-D) and to thus provide international data for the comparison of different mental health services. SAMPLING AND METHODS: The HoNOS was translated into German (HoNOS-D) in an extensive and multilayered consensus procedure. The HoNOS-D was then reviewed within the framework of a pilot study on quality assurance measures implemented by the German statutory health insurance institutes in 11 hospitals. Assessments were made of the psychometric qualities of feasibility and reliability using a representative sample of patients with mental and behavioral disorders. RESULTS: An analysis of the feasibility of the HoNOS-D showed a range of missing values between 1.3 and 4.5% for 11 of the 12 items. An item analysis showed that three items of the HoNOS-D are particularly positively skewed. In most instances, the individual items of the rating scale exhibited only slight correlations to each other. With regard to retest reliability, satisfactory intraclass correlations between 0.80 and 0.91 were seen for 9 of the 12 items. CONCLUSIONS: The authors of the original version of the HoNOS [Wing et al.:Br J Psychiatry 1998;172:11-18] primarily emphasized the feasibility of the instrument and the independence of the individual items and dimensions. The analysis of the missing values showed satisfactory results for feasibility. The intercorrelation matrix of the individual items also exhibited only few correlations >0.30. The retest reliability also proves to be satisfactory for the majority of the items. The narrow distribution of some of the items must be critically discussed in comparison to analyses of results in other countries (e.g. Great Britain) and other settings (e.g. inpatient psychiatric hospitals or outpatient psychotherapy).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000098492

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Andreas, S., Harfst, T., Dirmaier, J., Kawski, S., Koch, U., & Schulz, H.
Affiliations
University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Psychopathology
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2007
Volume
40
Issue
2
Pages
116-125
ISSN
  • 0254-4962 (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-033X
DOI
10.1159/000098492
OpenAlex
W2045158775
Cited by
48
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsche Rentenversicherung
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
Keywords
Health of the Nation Outcome Scales, German translation, psychometric properties, test-retest reliability, feasibility, missing data, mental illness, behavioral disorders, cross-cultural adaptation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Feasibility Studies, Female, Germany, Hospitalization, Humans, Language, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Assessment, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results, Outcome Assessment, Health Care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review