Author
Listed:
- Chris Lloyd
(Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research and the School of Population Health, The University of Queensland, Sumner Park BC, Queensland 4074, Australia)
- Robert King
(Department of Psychiatry, The University of Queensland, St Lucia Queensland 4072, Australia)
- Liz Moore
(PRA Consulting, Mermaid Beach, Queensland 4218, Australia, chris_lloyd@qcmhr.uq.edu.au)
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to determine whether subjective dimensions of recovery such as empowerment are associated with self-report of more objective indicators such as level of participation in the community and income from employment. A secondary aim was to investigate the extent to which diagnosis or other consumer characteristics mediated any relationship between these variables. Methods: The Community Integration Measure, the Empowerment Scale, the Recovery Assessment Scale, and the Camberwell Assessment of Needs Short Appraisal Schedule were administered to a convenience sample of 161 consumers with severe mental illness. Results: The majority of participants had a primary diagnosis of schizophreniform, anxiety/depression or bipolar affective disorder. The Empowerment Scale was quite strongly correlated with the Recovery Assessment Scale and the Community Integration Measure. Participants with a diagnosis of bipolar affective disorder had signifi cantly higher recovery and empowerment scores than participants with schizophrenia or depression. Both empowerment and recovery scores were significantly higher for people engaged in paid employment than for those receiving social security benefits. Conclusions: The measurement of subjective dimensions of recovery such as empowerment has validity in evaluation of global recovery for people with severe mental illness. A diagnosis of bipolar disorder is associated with higher scores on subjective and objective indicators of recovery.
Suggested Citation
Chris Lloyd & Robert King & Liz Moore, 2010.
"Subjective and Objective Indicators of Recovery in Severe Mental Illness: a Cross-Sectional Study,"
International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 56(3), pages 220-229, May.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:56:y:2010:i:3:p:220-229
DOI: 10.1177/0020764009105703
Download full text from publisher
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:sae:socpsy:v:56:y:2010:i:3:p:220-229. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.