Article

The Revised Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-R): Reliability and validity

Center for Health Quality Outcomes and Economics Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, Massachusetts, USA.
Medical Care (Impact Factor: 2.94). 01/2005; 42(12):1230-41. DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200412000-00010
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To assess outcomes of health services, providers need brief, responsive, reliable, and valid measures that can be implemented in clinical settings with minimal cost and burden. The Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-32) is a self-report measure developed in 1984 to assess mental health treatment outcomes. During the past 3 years, multiple methods were used to revise the instrument to improve reliability, validity, and applicability to diverse groups of mental health service recipients.
The objective of this study was to field test the revised instrument, make further changes based on analysis of the field test data, and assess reliability and validity of the final version (BASIS-24).
A field test was implemented at 27 treatment sites across the United States. A total of 2656 inpatients and 3222 outpatients participated. Factor analytic methods, classic test theory, and item response theory modeling were used to select the most discriminating, nonredundant items for inclusion in the final version of the instrument and to assess its reliability and validity. Item response theory modeling was used to score the instrument.
The final instrument includes 24 items assessing 6 domains: depression/ functioning, interpersonal relationships, self-harm, emotional lability, psychosis, and substance abuse. Test-retest and internal consistency reliability were acceptable. Tests of construct and discriminant validity supported the instrument's ability to discriminate groups expected to differ in mental health status, and its correlation with other measures of mental health.
Analyses of the BASIS-24 supported its reliability and validity for assessing mental health status from the patient's perspective.

0 Followers
 · 
120 Views
  • Source
    • "Study specific recovery curve algorithms, using the same process described above, were derived for the local CMHC sample. Comparing this local CMHC sample to the Eisen et al. (2004) national sample, we observed an agreement of ␬ ϭ 0.871 (95% confidence interval [CI] ϭ 0.793–0.945) for designation of off track status corresponding to very good agreement per Byrt (1996). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We describe the development and evaluation of a clinician feedback intervention for use in community mental health settings. The Community Clinician Feedback System (CCFS) was developed in collaboration with a community partner to meet the needs of providers working in such community settings. The CCFS consists of weekly performance feedback to clinicians, as well as a clinical feedback report that assists clinicians with patients who are not progressing as expected. Patients in the randomized sample (N = 100) were predominantly female African Americans, with a mean age of 39 years. Satisfaction ratings of the CCFS indicate that the system was widely accepted by clinicians and patients. A hierarchical linear models (HLM) analysis comparing rates of change across conditions controlling for baseline gender, age, and racial group indicated a moderate effect in favor of the feedback condition for symptom improvement, t(94) = 2.41, p = .017, d = .50. Thirty-six percent of feedback patients compared with only 13% of patients in the no-feedback condition demonstrated clinically significant change across treatment, χ2(1) = 6.13, p = .013. These results indicate that our CCFS is acceptable to providers and patients of mental health services and has the potential to improve the effectiveness of services for clinically meaningful depression in the community mental health setting. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
    Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 06/2015; DOI:10.1037/a0039302 · 4.85 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The items cover six domains including: depression/functioning, interpersonal relationships, psychotic symptoms, alcohol/drug use, and emotional lability . The measure has demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability and internal consistency and good construct and discriminant validity (Eisen et al. 2004). Further studies have supported the reliability, concurrent validity, and sensitivity of the BASIS-24 in specific racial groups (Eisen et al. 2006). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is substantial evidence that cognitive therapy is an effective intervention for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Although dynamic psychotherapies have been widely studied and are commonly practiced worldwide, there are few randomized comparisons of cognitive therapy and dynamic therapy for major depressive disorder. We are completing data collection on a randomized non-inferiority trial comparing the effectiveness of cognitive therapy and short-term dynamic psychotherapy in the treatment of major depressive disorder in the community mental health setting. Therapists employed in the community setting have been recruited for training in either short-term dynamic psychotherapy or cognitive therapy. Patients seeking services at the community site who meet criteria for major depressive disorder based on a blind independent diagnostic interview are randomized to 16 sessions of treatment. All patients are assessed at baseline and months 1, 2, 4, and 5 utilizing a comprehensive battery. This study adds to the growing literature evaluating the effectiveness of short-term dynamic psychotherapy for specific diagnostic groups. These results will have implications for the dissemination of effective interventions for major depressive disorder in community mental health settings. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, a service of the United States National Institute of Health. NIH Identifier: NCT01207271. Registered 21 September 2010.
    12/2014; 2(1):47. DOI:10.1186/s40359-014-0047-y
  • Source
    • "2.2.5. Psychosis The psychosis subscale from the 24-item Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale [BASIS-24; Eisen et al., 2004] "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Religious coping is very common among individuals with psychosis, however its relevance to symptoms and treatment outcomes remains unclear. We conducted a prospective study in a clinical sample of n=47 psychiatric patients with current/past psychosis receiving partial (day) treatment at McLean Hospital. Subjects completed measures of religious involvement, religious coping and suicidality prior to treatment, and we assessed for psychosis, depression, anxiety and psychological well-being over the course of treatment. Negative religious coping (spiritual struggle) was associated with substantially greater frequency and intensity of suicidal ideation, as well as greater depression, anxiety, and less well-being prior to treatment (accounting for 9.0-46.2% of the variance in these variables). Positive religious coping was associated with significantly greater reductions in depression and anxiety, and increases in well-being over the course of treatment (accounting for 13.7-36.0% of the variance in change scores). Effects remained significant after controlling for significant covariates. Negative religious coping appears to be a risk factor for suicidality and affective symptoms among psychotic patients. Positive religious coping is an important resource to this population, and its utilization appears to be associated with better treatment outcomes.
    05/2013; 210. DOI:10.1016/j.psychres.2013.03.023
Show more