This article is a brief report that draws on the literature and interviews with CMHEI investigators to explore the challenges of obtaining research ethics board approval for multi-site studies. It goes on to suggest how the complexity of multi-site approval could be addressed in terms of study budget, staff time, and study timelines.
The Mulh Community Ability Scale (MCAS) is a standardized measure of functioning of people with mental illness living in the community. This study assessed feasibility and utility of the MCAS for routine outcome monitoring of clients enrolled in intensive community support programs. Burden related to training and administration was assessed and scale properties were evaluated, using data collected from a multisite community mental health evaluation initiative. Minimum effort was required to achieve good inter-rater reliability and administer the measure.
In an earlier article, we described the mindset and process for implementing and conducting a multi-site study. In this article, we take the perspective of the multi-site study's coordinating centre. Using the Community Mental Health Evaluation Initiative as a case study, we focus on four major aspects of the initiative — data collection and management, the evaluated programs, partnerships, and knowledge transfer.