Measurement properties of tools measuring mental health knowledge: A systematic review

Producción científica: Contribución a una revistaArtículorevisión exhaustiva

98 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

Background: Mental health literacy has received great attention recently to improve mental health knowledge, decrease stigma and enhance help-seeking behaviors. We conducted a systematic review to critically appraise the qualities of studies evaluating the measurement properties of mental health knowledge tools and the quality of included measurement properties. Methods: We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and ERIC for studies addressing psychometrics of mental health knowledge tools and published in English. We applied the COSMIN checklist to assess the methodological quality of each study as "excellent", "good", "fair", or "indeterminate". We ranked the level of evidence of the overall quality of each measurement property across studies as "strong", "moderate", "limited", "conflicting", or "unknown". Results: We identified 16 mental health knowledge tools in 17 studies, addressing reliability, validity, responsiveness or measurement errors. The methodological quality of included studies ranged from "poor" to "excellent" including 6 studies addressing the content validity, internal consistency or structural validity demonstrating "excellent" quality. We found strong evidence of the content validity or internal consistency of 6 tools; moderate evidence of the internal consistency, the content validity or the reliability of 8 tools; and limited evidence of the reliability, the structural validity, the criterion validity, or the construct validity of 12 tools. Conclusions: Both the methodological qualities of included studies and the overall evidence of measurement properties are mixed. Based on the current evidence, we recommend that researchers consider using tools with measurement properties of strong or moderate evidence that also reached the threshold for positive ratings according to COSMIN checklist.

Idioma originalEnglish
Número de artículo297
PublicaciónBMC Psychiatry
Volumen16
N.º1
DOI
EstadoPublished - ago. 23 2016

Nota bibliográfica

Funding Information:
We would like to acknowledge that this study is supported by Yifeng Wei’s Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Knowledge Translation/ Bourse de recherché, issued by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. McGrath is supported by a Canada Research Chair. In addition, we would like to express deep appreciation to Ms. Catherine Morgan for her tremendous help with data collection and analysis, and the health librarian, Ms. Robin Parker, who helped with designing the search strategies of this review.

Funding Information:
This study is supported by Yifeng Wei’s Doctoral Research Award - Priority Announcement: Knowledge Translation/Bourse de recherché, issued by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. McGrath is supported by a Canada Research Chair.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 The Author(s).

ASJC Scopus Subject Areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Huella

Profundice en los temas de investigación de 'Measurement properties of tools measuring mental health knowledge: A systematic review'. En conjunto forman una huella única.

Citar esto