No single vali date d outcome measure encompassed all potential patient benefits from using a CGS .
A variety of different domains were identified , including anxiety and depression , coping , decision-making , distress , family environment , health status , knowledge , mood , perception of risk , perceived personal control , psychological impact , quality of life , satisfaction and expectations , self-esteem , spiritual well-being , and worry .
Some important aspects of patient benefit from CGS are not covered by existing outcome measures .
OBJECTIVE This systematic review aim ed to inform research ers and policymakers about what vali date d outcome measures are available to evaluate clinical genetics services ( CGS ) and the need for new measures .
Unpublished rating scales: a major source of bias in randomised controlled trials of treatments for schizophrenia.
BACKGROUND A recent review suggested an association between using unpublished scales in clinical trials and finding significant results . AIMS To determine whether such an association existed in schizophrenia trials . METHOD Three hundred trials were r and omly selected from the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group 's Register . All comparisons between treatment groups and control groups using rating scales  were identified . The publication status of each scale was determined and cl aims of a significant treatment effect were recorded . RESULTS Trials were more likely to report that a treatment was superior to control when an unpublished scale was used to make the comparison ( relative risk 1.37 ( 95 % CI 1.12 - 1.68 ) ) . This effect increased when a ' gold-st and ard ' definition of treatment superiority was applied ( RR 1.94 ( 95 % CI 1.35 - 2.79 ) ) . In non-pharmacological trials , one-third of ' gold-st and ard ' cl aims of treatment superiority would not have been made if published scales had been used . CONCLUSIONS Unpublished scales are a source of bias in schizophrenia trials
No single vali date d outcome measure encompassed all potential patient benefits from using a CGS .
A variety of different domains were identified , including anxiety and depression , coping , decision-making , distress , family environment , health status , knowledge , mood , perception of risk , perceived personal control , psychological impact , quality of life , satisfaction and expectations , self-esteem , spiritual well-being , and worry .
Some important aspects of patient benefit from CGS are not covered by existing outcome measures .
OBJECTIVE This systematic review aim ed to inform research ers and policymakers about what vali date d outcome measures are available to evaluate clinical genetics services ( CGS ) and the need for new measures .