a Sun Life Financial Chair in Adolescent Mental Health team, IWK Health Centre and Dalhousie University , Halifax , Canada.
b IWK Health Centre, Nova Scotia Health Authority and Dalhousie University , Halifax , Canada.
J Ment Health. 2017 Dec;26(6):543-555. doi: 10.1080/09638237.2016.1276532. Epub 2017 Mar 30.
Mental health literacy is important to improve help-seeking behaviors. However, the quality of mental health help-seeking tools remains unknown.
We conducted a systematic review to appraise the quality of such tools.
We searched databases for English publications addressing psychometrics of help-seeking tools. We included help-seeking tools addressing mental health in general and tools on four mental disorders: anxiety, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and schizophrenia. We determined the methodological quality of studies as "excellent", "good", "fair", or "indeterminate". We ranked the level of evidence of each measurement property as "strong", "moderate", "limited", "conflicting" or "unknown".
We found 12 help-seeking tools in 24 studies that assessed related psychometrics. The methodological quality of included studies ranged from "poor" to "excellent" with four studies on the content validity, structural validity or internal consistency demonstrating "excellent" quality. Three tools demonstrated overall strong evidence (content or structural validity); eight tools demonstrated moderate evidence (internal consistency, structural or construct validity); and eight tools demonstrated limited evidence (reliability, construct validity or internal consistency).
We recommend the application of tools with strong or moderate evidence for their psychometric properties. Future research may focus on the generalizability of the tools across diverse settings.
心理健康素养对于改善寻求帮助的行为很重要。然而,心理健康求助工具的质量仍然未知。
我们进行了系统评价,以评估这些工具的质量。
我们搜索了数据库中有关心理健康求助工具心理测量学的英文出版物。我们纳入了一般心理健康和四种精神障碍(焦虑症、抑郁症、注意缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)和精神分裂症)的求助工具。我们将研究的方法学质量评定为“优秀”、“良好”、“中等”或“不确定”。我们将每个测量特性的证据水平评为“强”、“中”、“有限”、“矛盾”或“未知”。
我们在 24 项研究中发现了 12 种用于评估相关心理测量学的求助工具。纳入研究的方法学质量从“差”到“优秀”不等,四项研究在内容效度、结构效度或内部一致性方面表现出“优秀”的质量。有三种工具总体上具有较强的证据(内容或结构效度);八种工具具有中等证据(内部一致性、结构或构念效度);八种工具具有有限的证据(可靠性、构念效度或内部一致性)。
我们建议应用具有较强或中等心理测量学特性证据的工具。未来的研究可能集中在工具在不同环境中的可推广性上。