Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Validating quality indicators. Quality as relationship between structure, process, and outcome.

M S Salzer1, C T Nixon, L J Schut

  • 1Center for Mental Health Policy, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37212, USA.

Evaluation Review
|May 7, 1997
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Adopting innovations--lessons learned from a peer-based hospital diversion program.

Community mental health journal·2001
Same author

Measuring mental health outcomes with pre-post designs.

The journal of behavioral health services & research·2001
Same author

Looking for the disorder in conduct disorder.

Journal of abnormal psychology·2001
Same author

Refining the costs analyses of the Fort Bragg evaluation: the impact of cost offset and cost shifting.

Mental health services research·2001
Same author

Child sexual abuse II: treatment.

The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry·2001
Same author

The co-occurrence of psychiatric and substance use diagnoses in adolescents in different service systems: frequency, recognition, cost, and outcomes.

The journal of behavioral health services & research·2000
Same journal

Brokerage, Gender, and Academic Performance in Interdisciplinary Co-Authorship Networks: A Study of Policy-Related Social Learning Publications.

Evaluation review·2026
Same journal

Peer-led Support Groups for Parents Following Child Removal: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation Study.

Evaluation review·2026
Same journal

Teacher-AI Collaboration to Support Assessment and Feedback: A Case Study in Norwegian Secondary Education.

Evaluation review·2026
Same journal

Green Policies for the Circular Economy and Entrepreneurship: International Evidence.

Evaluation review·2026
Same journal

Transparency, Ethical Framing, and User Agency as Determinants of Trust in AI-Mediated Assessment: Informing the Design of Trustworthy Systems.

Evaluation review·2026
Same journal

No Evidence that Banning the Purchase of Sex Increases Rape: A Replication Study of Ciacci (2024, 2025).

Evaluation review·2026
See all related articles

This study introduces a framework for validating mental health care quality indicators. Adopting this framework ensures accurate quality measurement, aiding continuous improvement and informed decision-making for purchasers and consumers.

Area of Science:

  • Mental Health Services Research
  • Health Services Administration
  • Quality Improvement Science

Background:

  • Growing interest in evaluating mental health care quality.
  • Current use of unvalidated quality indicators.
  • Gap between theory/research and practical quality assessment.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To offer a framework for validating mental health care quality indicators.
  • To promote the use of valid indicators for quality measurement.
  • To support continuous quality improvement in mental health agencies.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptualizing quality as the relationship between service structures, processes, and outcomes.
  • Developing a systematic approach for indicator validation.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Reviewing existing literature on quality measurement in mental health.

    • Main Results:

    • A proposed framework for validating quality indicators.
    • Emphasis on the link between structural, process, and outcome measures.
    • Potential for improved accuracy in quality assessment.

    Conclusions:

    • Adoption of the framework facilitates valid quality measurement.
    • Valid quality indicators aid continuous quality improvement efforts.
    • Informed purchasers and consumers benefit from reliable quality data.