Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Towards a standardised brief outcome measure: Psychometric properties and utility of the CORE–OM

  • Chris Evans (a1), Janice Connell (a1), Michael Barkham (a1), Frank Margison (a1), Graeme McGrath (a2), John Mellor-Clark (a3) and Kerry Audin (a4)...
Abstract
Background

An acceptable, standardised outcome measure to assess efficacy and effectiveness is needed across multiple disciplines offering psychological therapies.

Aims

To present psychometric data on reliability, validity and sensitivity to change for the CORE–OM (Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation – Outcome Measure).

Method

A 34-item self-report instrument was developed, with domains of subjective well-being, symptoms, function and risk. Analysis includes internal reliability, test–retest reliability, socio-demographic differences, exploratory principal-component analysis, correlations with other instruments, differences between clinical and non-clinical samples and assessment of change within a clinical group.

Results

Internal and test–retest reliability were good (0.75–0.95), as was convergent validity with seven other instruments, with large differences between clinical and non-clinical samples and good sensitivity to change.

Conclusions

The CORE–OM is a reliable and valid instrument with good sensitivity to change. It is acceptable in a wide range of practice settings.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Towards a standardised brief outcome measure: Psychometric properties and utility of the CORE–OM
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Towards a standardised brief outcome measure: Psychometric properties and utility of the CORE–OM
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Towards a standardised brief outcome measure: Psychometric properties and utility of the CORE–OM
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
Dr Chris Evans, Rampton Hospital, Retford, Nottinghamshire DN22 0PD, UK. E-mail: chris@psyctc.org
References
Hide All
Barkham, M. Hardy, G. E. & Startup, M. (1996) The IIP-32: development of a short version of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems, British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 35, 2135.
Barkham, M. Evans, C. Margison, F. et al (1998) The rationale for developing and implementing core outcome batteries for routine use in service settings and psychotherapy outcome research. Journal of Mental Health, 7, 3547.
Barkham, M. Margison, F. Leach, C. et al (2001) Service profiling and outcomes benchmarking using the CORE–OM: towards practice-based evidence in the psychological therapies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69, 184196.
Beck, A. T. Ward, C. H. Mendelson, M. et al (1961) An inventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 561571.
Beck, A. T. Epstein, N. Brown, G. et al (1988) An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: psychometric properties. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 893897.
Beck, A. T. Steer, R. A. & Brown, G. K. (1996) Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory — Second Edition (BDI–II). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Cattell, R. B. (1966) The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245276.
Core System Group (1998) CORE System (Information Management) Handbook. Leeds: Core System Group.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951) Coefficent alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297334.
Department of Health (1996) NHS Psychotherapy Services in England. Review of Strategic Policy. London: HMSO.
Department of Health (1999) A National Service Framework for Mental Health. London: Stationery Office.
Derogatis, L. R. (1983) SCL–90–R: Administration, Scoring & Procedures: Manual. Towson, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research.
Derogatis, L. R. & Melisaratos, N. (1983) The Brief Symptom Inventory: an introductory report. Psychological Medicine, 13, 595605.
Evans, C. E. Margison, F. & Barkham, M. (1998) The contribution of reliable and clinically significant change methods to evidence-based mental health. Evidence-based Mental Health, 1, 7072.
Evans, C. E. Mellor-Clark, J. Margison, F. et al (2000) Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation: the CORE Outcome Measure (CORE–OM). Journal of Mental Health, 9, 247255.
Feldt, L. S. Woodruff, D. J. & Salih, F. A. (1987) Statistical inference for coefficient alpha. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11, 93103.
Formic Design and Automatic Data Capture (1996) FORMIC 3 for Windows. London: Formic Ltd.
Froyd, J. E. Lambert, M. J. & Froyd, J. D. (1996) A review of practices of psychotherapy outcome measurement. Journal of Mental Health, 5, 1115.
Gardner, M. J. & Altman, D. G. (1986) Confidence intervals rather than P values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. BMJ, 292, 746750.
Gardner, M. J. Gardner, S. B. & Winter, P. D. (1989) Confidence Interval Analysis (C. I. A.) Microcomputer Program Manual. London: BMJ Press.
Goldberg, D. P. & Hillier, V. F. (1979) Ascaled version of the General Health Questionnaire. Psychological Medicine, 9, 139145.
Howard, K. I. Lueger, R. J. Maling, M. et al (1993) A phase model of psychotherapy outcome: causal mediation of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 678685.
Jacobson, N. S. & Truax, P. (1991) Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 1219.
Margison, F. R. Barkham, M. Evans, C. et al (2000) Measurement and psychotherapy. Evidence-based practice and practice-based evidence. British Journal of Psychiatry, 177, 123130.
Roth, A. & Fonagy, P. (1996) What Works for Whom? A Critical Review of Psychotherapy Research. New York: Guilford.
SAS Institute (1990) SAS/IML Software: Usage and Reference. Version 6 (1st edn). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
Strupp, H. H. Horowitz, L. M. & Lambert, M. J. (1997) Measuring Patient Changes in Mood, Anxiety and Personality Disorders: Toward a Core Battery. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Thornicroft, G. & Slade, M. (2000) Are routine outcome measures feasible in mental health? Quality in Health Care, 9, 84.
Waskow, I. E. (1975) Selection of a core battery. In Psychotherapy Change Measures (eds Waskow, I. E. & Parloff, M. B.), pp. 245269. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Mental Health.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The British Journal of Psychiatry
  • ISSN: 0007-1250
  • EISSN: 1472-1465
  • URL: /core/journals/the-british-journal-of-psychiatry
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 20
Total number of PDF views: 243 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 851 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 16th August 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Towards a standardised brief outcome measure: Psychometric properties and utility of the CORE–OM

  • Chris Evans (a1), Janice Connell (a1), Michael Barkham (a1), Frank Margison (a1), Graeme McGrath (a2), John Mellor-Clark (a3) and Kerry Audin (a4)...
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *