Suppr超能文献

心理健康服务康复取向的衡量标准:系统评价。

Measures of the recovery orientation of mental health services: systematic review.

机构信息

Section for Recovery, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, Box PO29, SE5 8AF, UK.

出版信息

Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2012 Nov;47(11):1827-35. doi: 10.1007/s00127-012-0484-y. Epub 2012 Feb 10.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The review aimed to (1) identify measures that assess the recovery orientation of services; (2) discuss how these measures have conceptualised recovery, and (3) characterise their psychometric properties.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken using seven sources. The conceptualisation of recovery within each measure was investigated by rating items against a conceptual framework of recovery comprising five recovery processes: connectedness; hope and optimism; identity; meaning and purpose; and empowerment. Psychometric properties of measures were evaluated using quality criteria.

RESULTS

Thirteen recovery orientation measures were identified, of which six met eligibility criteria. No measure was a good fit with the conceptual framework. No measure had undergone extensive psychometric testing and none had data on test-retest reliability or sensitivity to change.

CONCLUSIONS

Many measures have been developed to assess the recovery orientation of services. Comparisons between the measures were hampered by the different conceptualisations of recovery used and by the lack of uniformity on the level of organisation at which services were assessed. This situation makes it a challenge for services and researchers to make an informed choice on which measure to use. Further work is needed to produce measures with a transparent conceptual underpinning and demonstrated psychometric properties.

摘要

目的

本综述旨在:(1) 确定评估服务康复取向的测量工具;(2) 讨论这些测量工具如何对康复进行概念化;(3) 描述其心理测量学特性。

方法

采用七种来源进行系统综述。通过将项目与康复的概念框架进行评分,调查每个测量工具中的康复概念,该框架包括五个康复过程:联系;希望和乐观;身份认同;意义和目的;以及赋权。使用质量标准评估测量工具的心理测量学特性。

结果

确定了 13 种康复取向的测量工具,其中 6 种符合入选标准。没有一种测量工具与概念框架完全匹配。没有一种测量工具经过广泛的心理测量学测试,也没有关于重测信度或对变化的敏感性的数据。

结论

已经开发了许多测量工具来评估服务的康复取向。由于使用的康复概念不同,以及评估服务的组织层面缺乏统一性,对这些工具进行比较受到阻碍。这种情况使得服务提供者和研究人员难以做出明智的选择,决定使用哪种测量工具。需要进一步的工作来制定具有透明概念基础和经过验证的心理测量学特性的测量工具。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验