A review of social inclusion measures

被引:40
作者
Coombs, Tim [1 ]
Nicholas, Angela [1 ,2 ]
Pirkis, Jane [2 ]
机构
[1] New South Wales Inst Psychiat, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Univ Melbourne, Melbourne Sch Populat Hlth, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
关键词
Social inclusion measure; COMMUNITY RESIDENTS; RELIABILITY; QUESTIONNAIRE; PARTICIPATION; COEFFICIENT; VALIDATION; AGREEMENT; DISTRESS; VALIDITY; PEOPLE;
D O I
10.1177/0004867413491161
中图分类号
R749 [精神病学];
学科分类号
100205 ;
摘要
Background: Social inclusion is crucial to mental health and well-being and is emphasised in Australia's Fourth National Mental Health Plan. There is a recognition that a measure of social inclusion would complement the suite of outcome measures that is currently used in public sector mental health services. This paper is an initial scope of candidate measures of social inclusion and considers their suitability for this purpose. Methods: We identified potential measures through searches of PsycINFO and Medline and a more general Internet search. We extracted descriptive and evaluative information on each measure identified and compared this information with a set of eight criteria. The criteria related to the measure's inclusion of four domains of social inclusion outlined in Australia's Fourth National Mental Health Plan, its usability within the public mental health sector and its psychometric properties. Results: We identified 10 candidate measures of social inclusion: the Activity and Participation Questionnaire (APQ-6); the Australian Community Participation Questionnaire (ACPQ); the Composite Measure of Social Inclusion (CMSI); the EMILIA Project Questionnaire (EPQ); the Evaluating Social Inclusion Questionnaire (ESIQ); the Inclusion Web (IW); the Social and Community Opportunities Profile (SCOPE); the Social Inclusion Measure (SIM); the Social Inclusion Questionnaire (SIQ); and the Staff Survey of Social Inclusion (SSSI). After comparison with the eight review criteria, we determined that the APQ-6 and the SCOPE-short form show the most potential for further testing. Conclusions: Social inclusion is too important not to measure. This discussion of individual-level measures of social inclusion provides a springboard for selecting an appropriate measure for use in public sector mental health services. It suggests that there are two primary candidates, but neither of these is quite fit-for-purpose in their current form. Further exploration will reveal whether one of these is suitable, whether another measure might be adapted for the current purpose or whether a new, specifically designed measure needs to be developed.
引用
收藏
页码:906 / 919
页数:14
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2008, BRIT J OCCUP THER
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2012, Personal recovery and mental illness: A guide for mental health professionals, DOI DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511581649
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2009, 4 NAT MENT HLTH PLAN
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2004, MENT HLTH SOC EXCL S
[5]  
Anthony W.A., 1993, Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal, V16, P11, DOI [10.1037/h0095655, DOI 10.1037/H0095655]
[6]  
Australian Mental Health Outcomes and Classification Network, 2005, REP FRAM NAT OUTC CA
[7]  
Bates P., 2001, A Life in the Day, V5, P18
[8]   Preliminary development and validation of an Australian community participation questionnaire: Types of participation and associations with distress in a coastal community [J].
Berry, Helen Louise ;
Rodgers, Bryan ;
Dear, Keith B. G. .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2007, 64 (08) :1719-1737
[9]  
Bertram G, 2005, J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs, V12, P387, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2005.00849.x
[10]   A Day in the Life of Women with a Serious Mental Illness: A Qualitative Investigation [J].
Borba, Christina P. C. ;
DePadilla, Lara ;
Druss, Benjamin G. ;
McCarty, Frances A. ;
von Esenwein, Silke A. ;
Sterk, Claire E. .
WOMENS HEALTH ISSUES, 2011, 21 (04) :286-292