Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Email this article to a Colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Articles & Searches Download to citation manager Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Articles by Greenberg, G. A. Articles by Rosenheck, R. A. Search for Related Content PubMed Citation Articles by Greenberg, G. A. Articles by Rosenheck, R. A. Veterans Hospitals, Hospital Treatment Rating Scales (Nondiagnostic) Related Article

Special Section on the GAF: Using the GAF as a National Mental Health Outcome Measure in the Department of Veterans Affairs

OBJECTIVE: Data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) were used to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), a single-item mental health status measure, as an outcome measure for large mental health care systems. METHODS: The sample consisted of VHA mental health patients who had at least two GAF scores 45 days apart in 2002 (N=283,754). First, to evaluate the discriminant validity of the GAF change measures, the authors examined the association of these measures with sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Facility-level risk-adjusted measures of GAF change were then created in three different clinical samples at more than 130 VHA medical centers, adjusting for patients' sociodemographic characteristics and diagnoses. The internal consistency of the scale created by using these items and their consistency across medical centers over time was evaluated. RESULTS: The analysis supported the discriminant validity of the GAF-derived measures. As expected, veterans who had a diagnosis of schizophrenia or Alzheimer's disease or who had service-connected disability ratings above 50 percent had lower baseline GAF scores and showed less improvement. The overall GAF performance measure had a high level of internal consistency (a standardized alpha of .85) and was highly consistent across facilities over time. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide preliminary empirical support for cautious use of a GAF-derived scale in monitoring changes in average facility-level outcomes over time. However, because of the potential for gaming of the measures and uncontrolled variation in the scale's administration across facilities, the scale should not be used to compare outcomes across facilities.

Related Article:

April 2005: This Month's Highlights
Psychiatr Serv 2005 56: 395. [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. Niv, A. N. Cohen, G. Sullivan, and A. S. Young The MIRECC Version of the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale: Reliability and Validity Psychiatr Serv, April 1, 2007; 58(4): 529 - 535. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. A. Greenberg and R. A. Rosenheck Special Section on the GAF: Continuity of Care and Clinical Outcomes in a National Health System Psychiatr Serv, April 1, 2005; 56(4): 427 - 433. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Get information about faster international access.

Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2005 American Psychiatric Association. All rights reserved.

Home | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Subscribe | All APPI Journals | Help | Contact Us