The CORE-OM as a Measure of Distress in Forensic Population - V1

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Examining the Validity of the CORE-OM as a Measure of Distress in a Forensic Population with Severe and Enduring Mental Illness.

  • IRAS ID

    277188

  • Contact name

    Maxine MacDonald

  • Contact email

    maxine.macdonald1@nhs.net

  • Sponsor organisation

    University of Edinburgh

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 3 months, 1 days

  • Research summary

    The Scottish Government recommends all adult psychological services in Scotland utilise standardised, routinely collected outcome measures. The Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) is one example, measuring psychological distress. However, there is limited evidence that this measure is generalisable to specialist populations such as forensic services or within populations experiencing psychosis, which is the most prevalent diagnosis within the State Hospital (TSH). TSH is a maximum security forensic inpatient facility. A study within TSH analysed CORE-OM data and found lower levels of distress than what might be anticipated in a forensic population with severe and enduring presentations (McIntosh et al., In Revision). Scores were lower than adults accessing primary and secondary services. This raises concern as to whether the CORE-OM is fit for purpose within this population and able to capture distress as experienced by TSH patients.

    The aim of this study is to examine aspects of the validity of the CORE-OM within a forensic mental health population. All patients detained within TSH from the time of the CORE’s implementation (February 2012) to the time of data collection (April 2020) will be considered. Those with a diagnosis of intellectual disability will be excluded. There will be no contact with patients at any point throughout the study as all data is routinely collected and pre-existing within the patients’ electronic case file. Data consists of self-report, clinician-rated, and objective behavioural data. This study hypothesises that clinician-rated and objective behavioural data will co-vary but that self-report data (CORE-OM) will not. The secondary hypothesis of this study proposes that self-report data will not correlate with clinician rated and objective behavioural data due to a lack of insight. Statistical analysis for longitudinal data will be conducted. The results of this study may have implications for the CORE-OM’s continued use within The State Hospital.

  • REC name

    South East Scotland REC 01

  • REC reference

    20/SS/0054

  • Date of REC Opinion

    24 Aug 2020

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion