IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v7y1983i5p635-658.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Mental Health Program Effectiveness

Author

Listed:
  • Jack L. Warner

    (University of Denver)

  • John J. Berman

    (University of Nebraska at Lincoln)

  • James M. Weyant

    (University of Denver)

  • James A. Ciarlo

    (University of Denver)

Abstract

In order to assess the advantages and disadvantages of face-to-face interviews, telephone interviews, and mailed questionnaires, 1100 clients were randomly assigned to one of these follow-up methods. All participating clients were contacted approximately 180 days after intake using a well-documented treatment outcome measure. Response rates for the telephone interview and mailed questionnaire were approximately one-half as high as the face-to-face interview, yet for each method very few client background variables were related to whether or not clients responded. The mailed questionnaire was least affected by socially desirable responses, and also cost less to administer than either of the interview methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Jack L. Warner & John J. Berman & James M. Weyant & James A. Ciarlo, 1983. "Assessing Mental Health Program Effectiveness," Evaluation Review, , vol. 7(5), pages 635-658, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:7:y:1983:i:5:p:635-658
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8300700503
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X8300700503
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X8300700503?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:7:y:1983:i:5:p:635-658. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.