IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0149973.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating and Quantifying User and Carer Involvement in Mental Health Care Planning (EQUIP): Co-Development of a New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure

Author

Listed:
  • Penny Bee
  • Chris Gibbons
  • Patrick Callaghan
  • Claire Fraser
  • Karina Lovell

Abstract

International and national health policy seeks to increase service user and carer involvement in mental health care planning, but suitable user-centred tools to assess the success of these initiatives are not yet available. The current study describes the development of a new reliable and valid, interval-scaled service-user and carer reported outcome measure for quantifying user/carer involvement in mental health care planning. Psychometric development reduced a 70-item item bank to a short form questionnaire using a combination of Classical Test, Mokken and Rasch Analyses. Test-retest reliability was calculated using t-tests of interval level scores between baseline and 2–4 week follow-up. Items were worded to be relevant to both service users and carers. Nine items were removed following cognitive debriefing with a service user and carer advisory group. An iterative process of item removal reduced the remaining 61 items to a final 14-item scale. The final scale has acceptable scalability (Ho = .69), reliability (alpha = .92), fit to the Rasch model (χ2(70) = 97.25, p = .02), and no differential item functioning or locally dependent items. Scores remained stable over the 4 week follow-up period, indicating good test-retest reliability. The ‘Evaluating the Quality of User and Carer Involvement in Care Planning (EQUIP)’ scale displays excellent psychometric properties and is capable of unidimensional linear measurement. The scale is short, user and carer-centred and will be of direct benefit to clinicians, services, auditors and researchers wishing to quantify levels of user and carer involvement in care planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Penny Bee & Chris Gibbons & Patrick Callaghan & Claire Fraser & Karina Lovell, 2016. "Evaluating and Quantifying User and Carer Involvement in Mental Health Care Planning (EQUIP): Co-Development of a New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0149973
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149973
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0149973
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0149973&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0149973?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alice Guilleux & Myriam Blanchin & Jean-Benoit Hardouin & Véronique Sébille, 2014. "Power and Sample Size Determination in the Rasch Model: Evaluation of the Robustness of a Numerical Method to Non-Normality of the Latent Trait," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-7, January.
    2. Mead, Nicola & Bower, Peter, 2000. "Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 1087-1110, October.
    3. van der Ark, L. Andries, 2007. "Mokken Scale Analysis in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 20(i11).
    4. van Schuur, Wijbrandt H., 2003. "Mokken Scale Analysis: Between the Guttman Scale and Parametric Item Response Theory," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 139-163, April.
    5. Chris J Gibbons & Cassandra Kenning & Peter A Coventry & Penny Bee & Christine Bundy & Louise Fisher & Peter Bower, 2013. "Development of a Multimorbidity Illness Perceptions Scale (MULTIPleS)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-12, December.
    6. van der Ark, L. Andries, 2012. "New Developments in Mokken Scale Analysis in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i05).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dima, Alexandra L. & Stutterheim, Sarah E. & Lyimo, Ramsey & de Bruin, Marijn, 2014. "Advancing methodology in the study of HIV status disclosure: The importance of considering disclosure target and intent," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 166-174.
    2. Coromina, Lluís & Camprubí, Raquel, 2016. "Analysis of tourism information sources using a Mokken Scale perspective," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 75-84.
    3. Andersson-Hudson, Jessica & Rose, Jonathan & Humphrey, Mathew & Knight, Wil & O'Hara, Sarah, 2019. "The structure of attitudes towards shale gas extraction in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 693-697.
    4. Anne-Linda Camerini & Peter J. Schulz, 2018. "Social Desirability Bias in Child-Report Social Well-Being: Evaluation of the Children’s Social Desirability Short Scale Using Item Response Theory and Examination of Its Impact on Self-Report Family ," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 11(4), pages 1159-1174, August.
    5. César Merino-Soto & Gina Chávez-Ventura & Verónica López-Fernández & Guillermo M. Chans & Filiberto Toledano-Toledano, 2022. "Learning Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-L): Psychometric and Measurement Invariance Evidence in Peruvian Undergraduate Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Rita Saleh & Angela Bearth & Michael Siegrist, 2019. "“Chemophobia” Today: Consumers’ Knowledge and Perceptions of Chemicals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(12), pages 2668-2682, December.
    7. Jesper Tijmstra & Maria Bolsinova, 2019. "Bayes Factors for Evaluating Latent Monotonicity in Polytomous Item Response Theory Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(3), pages 846-869, September.
    8. Bastiaan Bruinsma, 2020. "A comparison of measures to validate scales in voting advice applications," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 1299-1316, August.
    9. Mirko Antino & Jesús M. Alvarado & Rodrigo A. Asún & Paul Bliese, 2020. "Rethinking the Exploration of Dichotomous Data: Mokken Scale Analysis Versus Factorial Analysis," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 49(4), pages 839-867, November.
    10. Rudy Ligtvoet & L. Ark & Wicher Bergsma & Klaas Sijtsma, 2011. "Polytomous Latent Scales for the Investigation of the Ordering of Items," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 76(2), pages 200-216, April.
    11. Mazza, Angelo & Punzo, Antonio & McGuire, Brian, 2014. "KernSmoothIRT: An R Package for Kernel Smoothing in Item Response Theory," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 58(i06).
    12. Tyrone B. Pretorius & P. Paul Heppner & Anita Padmanabhanunni & Serena Ann Isaacs, 2023. "The PSI-20: Development of a Viable Short Form Alternative of the Problem Solving Inventory Using Item Response Theory," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    13. Jules Ellis, 2014. "An Inequality for Correlations in Unidimensional Monotone Latent Variable Models for Binary Variables," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 303-316, April.
    14. Wickelmaier, Florian & Strobl, Carolin & Zeileis, Achim, 2012. "Psychoco: Psychometric Computing in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i01).
    15. Martin Komarc & Ivana Harbichová & Lawrence M Scheier, 2020. "Psychometric validation of Czech version of the Sport Motivation Scale," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, January.
    16. Jules L. Ellis & Klaas Sijtsma, 2023. "A Test to Distinguish Monotone Homogeneity from Monotone Multifactor Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 387-412, June.
    17. Tendeiro, Jorge N. & Meijer, Rob R. & Niessen, A. Susan M., 2016. "PerFit: An R Package for Person-Fit Analysis in IRT," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 74(i05).
    18. Susan D Shenkin & Roger Watson & Ken Laidlaw & John M Starr & Ian J Deary, 2014. "The Attitudes to Ageing Questionnaire: Mokken Scaling Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-11, June.
    19. Michael Brusco & Hans-Friedrich Köhn & Douglas Steinley, 2015. "An Exact Method for Partitioning Dichotomous Items Within the Framework of the Monotone Homogeneity Model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(4), pages 949-967, December.
    20. Simon Otjes, 2018. "What’s Left of the Left–Right Dimension? Why the Economic Policy Positions of Europeans Do Not Fit the Left–Right Dimension," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 645-662, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0149973. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.