A systematic review of mental health measurement scales for evaluating the effects of mental health prevention interventions

被引:21
作者
Breedvelt, Josefien J. F. [1 ,2 ]
Zamperoni, Victoria [1 ]
South, Emily [3 ]
Uphoff, Eleonora P. [4 ]
Gilbody, Simon [5 ]
Bockting, Claudi L. H. [6 ]
Churchill, Rachel [4 ]
Kousoulis, Antonis A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Mental Hlth Fdn, Res Programmes & Policy, London, England
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Psychiat, Amsterdam UMC Locat AMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Univ York, Ctr Reviews & Disseminat, York, N Yorkshire, England
[4] Univ York, Ctr Reviews & Disseminat, Cochrane Common Mental Disorders, York, N Yorkshire, England
[5] Univ York, Mental Hlth & Addict Res Grp, York, N Yorkshire, England
[6] Univ Amsterdam, Inst Adv Study, Dept Psychiat, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS; DEPRESSION ANXIETY; STRESS SCALES; VALIDITY; DASS-21;
D O I
10.1093/eurpub/ckz233
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background: Consistent and appropriate measurement is needed in order to improve understanding and evaluation of preventative interventions. This review aims to identify individual-level measurement tools used to evaluate mental health prevention interventions to inform harmonization of outcome measurement in this area. Methods: Searches were conducted in PubMed, PsychInfo, CINAHL, Cochrane and OpenGrey for studies published between 2008 and 2018 that aimed to evaluate prevention interventions for common mental health problems in adults and used at least one measurement scale (PROSPERO CRD42018095519). For each study, mental health measurement tools were identified and reviewed for reliability, validity, ease-of-use and cultural sensitivity. Results: A total of 127 studies were identified that used 65 mental health measurement tools. Most were used by a single study (57%, N = 37) and measured depression (N = 20) or overall mental health (N = 18). The most commonly used questionnaire (15%) was the Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale. A further 125 tools were identified which measured non-mental health-specific outcomes. Conclusions: There was little agreement in measurement tools used across mental health prevention studies, which may hinder comparison across studies. Future research on measurement properties and acceptability of measurements in applied and scientific settings could be explored. Further work on supporting researchers to decide on appropriate outcome measurement for prevention would be beneficial for the field.
引用
收藏
页码:539 / 545
页数:7
相关论文
共 29 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], INDICATORS MONITORIN, DOI DOI 10.17226/24943
  • [2] Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample
    Antony, MM
    Bieling, PJ
    Cox, BJ
    Enns, MW
    Swinson, RP
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 1998, 10 (02) : 176 - 181
  • [3] A systematic review, psychometric analysis and qualitative assessment of generic preference-based measures of health in mental health populations and the estimation of mapping functions from widely used specific measures
    Brazier, John
    Connell, Janice
    Papaioannou, Diana
    Mukuria, Clara
    Mulhern, Brendan
    Peasgood, Tessa
    Jones, Myfawnwy Lloyd
    Paisley, Suzy
    O'Cathain, Alicia
    Barkham, Michael
    Knapp, Martin
    Byford, Sarah
    Gilbody, Simon
    Parry, Glenys
    [J]. HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, 2014, 18 (34) : 1 - +
  • [4] COWEN EL, 1980, AM J COMMUN PSYCHOL, V8, P258
  • [5] COX JL, 1987, BRIT J PSYCHIAT, V150, P782, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-1694-0_2
  • [6] Flake JK, 2019, QUESTIONABLE MEASURE
  • [7] Friedrich M J, 2017, JAMA, V317, P1517, DOI 10.1001/jama.2017.3826
  • [8] Goldie I., 2016, Mental health and prevention: Taking local action
  • [9] Greenhalgh J, 1998, J Eval Clin Pract, V4, P339
  • [10] The PHQ-9 - Validity of a brief depression severity measure
    Kroenke, K
    Spitzer, RL
    Williams, JBW
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2001, 16 (09) : 606 - 613