 On the validity of goal attainment scaling as an outcome measure in mental healthB. Willer and G. Miller American Journal of Public Health, 1976, vol. 66, issue 12, 1197-1198 Abstract: Goal attainment ratings by therapists were found to be poor predictors of all outcome measures. On the other hand, clients' ratings of goal attainment were found to correlate significantly with most other measures of treatment outcome. However, clients' goal attainment ratings did not correlate significantly with overall community adjustment which is one of the more important long term outcome measures. As well, the regression analysis indicated that clients' ratings were only slightly predictive of recidivism, and were considerably less powerful predictors than other outcome measures such as length of stay, employment, or community adjustment. These results suggest that goal attainment, as it was measured in the present study, had inadequate concurrent and predictive validity especially when measured by clients' therapists. The validity of goal attainment is vastly improved when clients are used as a source of rating. It is suggested that goal attainment scaling can only remain a viable tool for evaluation of hospital based mental health programs if clients are used as raters and if it is used conjointly with other more traditional measures of treatment outcome. Date: 1976 There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1976:66:12:1197-1198_2 Access Statistics for this article American Journal of Public Health is currently edited by Alfredo Morabia More articles in American Journal of Public Health from American Public Health Association |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.