P. Huxley et al., Matching resources to care: the acceptability, validity and inter-rater reliability of a new instrument to assess severe mental illness (MARC-1), SOC PSY PSY, 35(7), 2000, pp. 312-317
Background: Most definitions of severe mental illness (SMI) are categorical
and assign the patient to either SMI or not-SMI. status. While this is use
ful for some purposes, it is a rather limited approach. The purpose of the
present study is to develop a new method of addressing the issue of 'severi
ty', and to develop a dimensional rather than a categorical approach. The p
aper reports on the acceptability, reliability and validity of a method dev
eloped to collect a standard set of data covering the majority of items spe
cified in the academic and policy literature as characterising SMI. Method:
A single page form, Matching Resources to Care (MARC-I), containing most o
f the items used in definitions of SMI was used to collect data from commun
ity mental health staff about their current open caseload, in four co-termi
nous health and social services settings during a census week (n = 2139). I
n addition to the data from the four pilot sites, we conducted a substudy(n
= 91), in which two raters rated the same cases during the same week. Resu
lts: The MARC-1 scores were able to distinguish between patients in receipt
, and those not in receipt, of specific types of community care (level of c
are, eligibility for care and statutory aftercare) (P < 0.001). The MARC-1
score was modestly but significantly correlated (r = 0.28) with the Global
Assessment Scale (P < 0.001). The mean percentage interrater agreement for
the MARC-I score items was 87%. Conclusion: It is possible to use a simple
census form in both health and social services agencies. The completion rat
es were good in both services. The levels of reliability were good, and con
current validity was established with specific types of care in the communi
ty.