Cited by 41Healthcare Quality and ManagementPrimary Care and Health OutcomesPsychiatric care and mental health services

The current state of behavioral health quality measures: where are the gaps?

Patel, Milesh M., Brown, Jonathan D., Croake, Sarah, Lewis, Rita, Liu, Junqing, Patton, Lisa, Potter, D. E. B., Scholle, Sarah Hudson·2015·Psychiatric Services

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This review examined the extent to which existing behavioral health quality measures address the priority areas of the National Behavioral Health Quality Framework (NBHQF) as well as the extent to which the measures have received National Quality Forum endorsement and are used in major reporting programs. METHODS: This review identified behavioral health quality measures in widely used measure inventories, including the National Quality Measures Clearinghouse, National Quality Forum, and the Center for Quality Assessment in Mental Health. Additional measures were identified through outreach to federal agencies. Measures were categorized by type, condition, target population, data source, reporting unit, endorsement status, and use in reporting programs. RESULTS: The review identified 510 measures. Nearly one-third of these measures address broad mental health or substance use conditions rather than a specific condition or diagnosis. Seventy-two percent are process measures. The most common data source for measures is administrative claims, and very few measures rely on electronic health records or surveys. Fifty-three (10%) measures have received National Quality Forum (NQF) endorsement, and 28 (5%) unique measures are used in major quality reporting programs. Several subdomains of the NBHQF, such as treatment intensification, financial barriers to care, and continuity of care, lack measures that are NQF endorsed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the wide array of behavioral health quality measures, relatively few have received endorsement or are used in reporting programs. Future efforts should seek to fill gaps in measurement and to identify the most salient and strongest measures in each priority area.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.ps.201400589

Cites

8 of 8 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?

  • In the US, despite parity laws and more than 500 measures for monitoring mental health care quality, only 5% of these measures are used in major quality reporting programs and only 10% have been endorsed by the National Quality Forum.

    “Yet, despite the mental health parity laws passed ten years ago, which stipulate equal coverage for mental health conditions, and the availability of over 500 measures for monitoring quality of mental health care, only 5% of these measures are actually used in the above major quality reporting programs, and only 10% of the measures have been endorsed by the US National Quality Forum 60”
  • Of the available mental health quality measures, 72% focus on processes quite distal to outcomes rather than on process measures indicating treatment adequacy or intensity.

    “Of these available measures, the majority (72%) focus on processes quite distal to outcomes (e.g., screening/assessment) 60 rather than on process measures that indicate treatment adequacy or intensity for mental health care.”
  • Because many mental health quality measures are not linked to existing data sources, they cannot be automated to generate meaningful data.

    “As a result, these measures cannot be automated to generate meaningful data 60 , which in return could support quality measurement and inform routine medical practices and procedures.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 9 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Patel, M. M., Brown, J. D., Croake, S., Lewis, R., Liu, J., Patton, L., Potter, D. E. B., & Scholle, S. H.
Affiliations
United States Department of Health and Human Services (US)
Venue
Psychiatric Services
Published
2015-08-01
Volume
66
Issue
8
Pages
865-871
ISSN
  • 0022-1597 (ISSN-L)
  • 1075-2730
  • 1557-9700
OpenAlex
W1943590152
Cited by
41
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1
FWCI
8.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychiatric Services (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Mathematica Policy Research Reports (submittedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Public Health Service (HHSP23320100019WI, HHSP23337001T)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
mental health, substance use disorders, process indicators, data sources, financial barriers to care, continuity of care, treatment intensification, measurement gaps
MeSH terms
Humans, Mental Health Services, Quality Indicators, 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