Aims: Stigma of mental illness is a significant barrier to receiving mental health care. However, measurement tools evaluating stigma of mental illness have not been systematically assessed for their quality. We conducted a systematic review to critically appraise the methodological quality of studies assessing psychometrics of stigma measurement tools and determined the level of evidence of overall quality of psychometric properties of included tools.
Methods: We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and ERIC databases for eligible studies. We conducted risk-of-bias analysis with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments checklist, rating studies as excellent, good, fair or poor. We further rated the level of evidence of the overall quality of psychometric properties, combining the study quality and quality of each psychometric property, as: strong, moderate, limited, conflicting or unknown.
Results: We identified 117 studies evaluating psychometric properties of 101 tools. The quality of specific studies varied, with ratings of: excellent (n = 5); good (mostly on internal consistency (n = 67)); fair (mostly on structural validity, n = 89 and construct validity, n = 85); and poor (mostly on internal consistency, n = 36). The overall quality of psychometric properties also varied from: strong (mostly content validity, n = 3), moderate (mostly internal consistency, n = 55), limited (mostly structural validity, n = 55 and construct validity, n = 46), conflicting (mostly test-retest reliability, n = 9) and unknown (mostly internal consistency, n = 36).
Conclusions: We identified 12 tools demonstrating limited evidence or above for (+, ++, +++) all their properties, 69 tools reaching these levels of evidence for some of their properties, and 20 tools that did not meet the minimum level of evidence for all of their properties. We note that further research on stigma tool development is needed to ensure appropriate application.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6999021 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S2045796017000178 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Development and validation of the Information Literacy Measurement Scale (ILMS-34) in Chinese public health practitioners.
BMC Med Educ
January 2025
School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Background: Public health professionals (PHPs) have increasing information needs to inform evidence-based public health decisions and practice, which requires good information literacy. A comprehensive and reliable assessment tool is necessary to assess PHPs' literacy and guide future promotion programs. However, there is a lack of measurement tools specifically for the information literacy of PHPs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFReliability and validity of the unhelpful thoughts and beliefs scale for Persian-speaking adults who stutter (UTBAS-P): A cross-cultural examination of social anxiety in people who stutter.
J Fluency Disord
January 2025
Faculty of Health, Charles Darwin University, Australia. Electronic address:
Background And Aim: An increasing body of research indicates that many adults who stutter (AWS) experience anxiety in social and verbal situations. The Unhelpful Thoughts and Beliefs about Stuttering (UTBAS) scales were developed to assess speech-related anxiety and negative cognitions associated with stuttering. This study aimed to translate the UTBAS into Persian, investigate its psychometric properties for Persian-speaking AWS, and compare the results with previously published UTBAS scores across various cultures.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFImproved Items for Estimating SF-36 Profile and Summary Component Scores: Construction and Validation of an 8-item QOL General (QGEN) Survey.
Med Care
January 2025
John Ware Research Group (JWRG), Watertown, MA.
Background: Comprehensive health-related quality of life (QOL) assessment under severe respondent burden constraints requires improved single-item scales for frequently surveyed domains. This article documents how new single-item-per-domain (SIPD) QOL General (QGEN-8) measures were constructed for domains common to SF-36 and results from the first psychometric tests comparing scores for the new measure in relation to those for the SF-36 profile and summary components.
Research Design: Online NORC surveys of adults, ages 19-93 (mean=52 y) representing the US population in 2020 (N=1648) included QGEN-8 and SF-36 items measuring physical (PF), social (SF), role physical (RP) and role emotional (RE) functioning and feelings of bodily pain (BP), vitality (VT), and mental health (MH).
Validation of the eHealth literacy scales: comparison between the shorter and longer versions.
Inform Health Soc Care
January 2025
Department of Social Informatics, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Digital service provision became necessary during and after the COVID-19 pandemic highlighting the technological disparity experienced by healthcare professionals and healthcare users. eHealth Literacy skills are mostly measured with the use of the eHeals, but recently more instruments have been developed to meet this need. The aim of the study was to validate and compare the two scales in Greek: the eHeals and the revised eHeals-Extended.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFTranslation, cross-cultural adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Indonesian version of the Oxford Shoulder Score for patients with shoulder pain.
JSES Int
November 2024
Department of Orthopedics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Background: No questionnaire is currently available for use in patients with shoulder pain in an Indonesian-speaking population. This study aimed to translate the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) into Indonesian and assess its validity and reliability for use in Indonesian-speaking patients with shoulder pain.
Methods: After a forward and backward translation procedure, the validity and reliability of the questionnaire were investigated.
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!