Abstract
AbstractFidelity scales are indispensable in the pursuit of evidence-based mental healthcare. Without fidelity checks, treatment remains a mysterious black box. The aim of this article is to comment on the studies in this special section, and to discuss some general issues with regard to fidelity assessment. Despite all of their supposed benefits, resistance to fidelity scales persists among mental health practitioners. One way to overcome this resistance is to conduct fidelity assessments in the context of a well-guided learning community. The predictive validity of fidelity scales is considered the single most valuable attribute of these instruments. Research on predictive validity requires large sample sizes, which is difficult to achieve. It should nevertheless not prevent us from rigorously searching for this Holy Grail of fidelity assessment. In addition, fidelity assessment should be placed in a broader perspective. The quality of care for people with severe mental illness cannot be assessed conclusively according to the extent to which separate interventions have been applied with good fidelity. These individuals need access to high-quality treatment and support systems within the community, which can enable them to live their lives as valued citizens. In conclusion, fidelity assessment, both at the level of interventions and systems, contributes to a highly desirable transparency in practice variations within the field of mental healthcare.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Phychiatric Mental Health
Reference33 articles.
1. Addington, D., Birchwood, M., Jones, P., Killackey, E., McDaid, D., et al. (2018). Fidelity scales and performance measures to support implementation and quality assurance for first episode psychosis services. Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 12(6), 1235–1242.
2. Alvarez-Monjarás, M. (2019). Fidelity measurement for the implementation of social networks interventions in complex mental health. D. Clin. Psy. Thesis (vol. 1), London, UK: University College London.
3. Anthony, W. A., & Blanch, A. (1989). Research on community support services: What have we learned? Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal, 12, 55–78.
4. Becker, D. R., Drake, R. E., & Bond, G. R. (2014). The IPS supported employment learning collaborative. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 37(2), 79–85.
5. Bond, G. R., & Drake, R. E. (2019). Assessing the fidelity of evidence-based practices: History and current status of a standardized measurement methodology. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-019-00991-6.
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献