Elizabeth E Marfeo1, Sue Eisen2, Pengsheng Ni1, Elizabeth K Rasch3, E Sally Rogers4, Alan Jette1. 1. Health and Disability Research Institute, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Center for Health Quality, Outcomes and Economic Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA, USA. 3. Rehabilitation Medicine Department, Mark O. Hatfield Clinical Research Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 4. Center for Psychiatric Rehabilitation, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROND: Questions exist related to the best way to use medical evidence relative to self-report as part of the SSA disability determination process. OBJECTIVE: To examine concordance between provider and claimant responses along the four dimensions of work related behavioral health functioning: Social Interactions, Mood and Emotions, Behavioral Control, and Self-Efficacy. METHODS: Using secondary data from a larger study, which collected data on individuals reporting difficulties with work (claimants) due to mental conditions, 39 items were completed by claimants and their healthcare provider. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using three techniques: Cohen's kappa, percent absolute agreement, and folded mountain plots. RESULTS: A sample of 65 dyads was obtained. Inter-rater agreement was low for most items (k=0.0-0.20) with a minority of items having fair agreement (k=0.21-0.40) Percent agreement was fair: Mood and Emotions (46%), Self-Efficacy (44%), Behavioral Control (39%) and Social Interactions (38%). Overall, providers reported lower functioning compared to claimants for the Behavioral Control and Self-Efficacy scales; the reverse trend held for the Mood and Emotions scale. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate discordance between provider and claimant report of behavioral health functioning. Understanding reasons for and approaches to reconciling the inconsistencies between claimant and provider perspectives is a complex task. These findings have implications for how best to assess mental and behavioral-health related work disability in the absence of an established gold standard measure.
BACKGROND: Questions exist related to the best way to use medical evidence relative to self-report as part of the SSA disability determination process. OBJECTIVE: To examine concordance between provider and claimant responses along the four dimensions of work related behavioral health functioning: Social Interactions, Mood and Emotions, Behavioral Control, and Self-Efficacy. METHODS: Using secondary data from a larger study, which collected data on individuals reporting difficulties with work (claimants) due to mental conditions, 39 items were completed by claimants and their healthcare provider. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using three techniques: Cohen's kappa, percent absolute agreement, and folded mountain plots. RESULTS: A sample of 65 dyads was obtained. Inter-rater agreement was low for most items (k=0.0-0.20) with a minority of items having fair agreement (k=0.21-0.40) Percent agreement was fair: Mood and Emotions (46%), Self-Efficacy (44%), Behavioral Control (39%) and Social Interactions (38%). Overall, providers reported lower functioning compared to claimants for the Behavioral Control and Self-Efficacy scales; the reverse trend held for the Mood and Emotions scale. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate discordance between provider and claimant report of behavioral health functioning. Understanding reasons for and approaches to reconciling the inconsistencies between claimant and provider perspectives is a complex task. These findings have implications for how best to assess mental and behavioral-health related work disability in the absence of an established gold standard measure.
Entities:
Keywords:
Work disability; behavioral health; disability evaluation
Authors: Philip D Harvey; Robert K Heaton; William T Carpenter; Michael F Green; James M Gold; Michael Schoenbaum Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2012-04-13 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Elizabeth E Marfeo; Pengsheng Ni; Stephen M Haley; Kara Bogusz; Mark Meterko; Christine M McDonough; Leighton Chan; Elizabeth K Rasch; Diane E Brandt; Alan M Jette Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2013-03-29 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Elizabeth E Marfeo; Pengsheng Ni; Stephen M Haley; Alan M Jette; Kara Bogusz; Mark Meterko; Christine M McDonough; Leighton Chan; Diane E Brandt; Elizabeth K Rasch Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2013-03-30 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Elizabeth E Marfeo; Pengsheng Ni; Christine McDonough; Kara Peterik; Molly Marino; Mark Meterko; Elizabeth K Rasch; Leighton Chan; Diane Brandt; Alan M Jette Journal: J Occup Rehabil Date: 2018-03