A systematic review of mental health measurement scales for evaluating the effects of mental health prevention interventions
Abstract 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 outc...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of public health 2020-06, Vol.30 (3), p.510-516 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 516 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 510 |
| container_title | European journal of public health |
| container_volume | 30 |
| creator | Breedvelt, Josefien J F Zamperoni, Victoria South, Emily Uphoff, Eleonora P Gilbody, Simon Bockting, Claudi L H Churchill, Rachel Kousoulis, Antonis A |
| description | Abstract
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. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1093/eurpub/ckz233 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_TOX</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2385707627</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/eurpub/ckz233</oup_id><sourcerecordid>2430172441</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-3addbd24cb19b26caab6141cda34a9ce8d50a017fd0c7b6ecbb2e18c7aa33c963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUlr3EAQhZsQY4-Xo6-hIRdflOlNLek4DPEChlxs8E1Ut0oZOdrSywSH_Pi0mXEM8cGnqnp89argEXLO2RfOKrnE6OZolvbHbyHlB7LgSqtMavbwMfWc8YwLLY7IsfePjLG8KMUhOZJCSJ2rckH-rKh_8gEHCJ2lDrcd_qJTSwccA_R0g9CHTZrAR4fPIvUWevS0nRzFLfQxLY7fadggxbZFG_zb9Tn5JqGbRtqNAd1-8KfkoIXe49m-npD7y6936-vs9tvVzXp1m1mVVyGT0DSmEcoaXhmhLYDRXHHbgFRQWSybnAHjRdswWxiN1hiBvLQFgJS20vKEXOx8Zzf9jOhDPXTeYt_DiFP0tZBlXrBCiyKhn_9DH6foxvRdLZRMR4RSPFHZjrJu8t5hW8-uG8A91ZzVz7HUu1jqXSyJ_7R3jWbA5h_9ksPrh1Oc3_H6C4BznHk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2430172441</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A systematic review of mental health measurement scales for evaluating the effects of mental health prevention interventions</title><source>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</source><creator>Breedvelt, Josefien J F ; Zamperoni, Victoria ; South, Emily ; Uphoff, Eleonora P ; Gilbody, Simon ; Bockting, Claudi L H ; Churchill, Rachel ; Kousoulis, Antonis A</creator><creatorcontrib>Breedvelt, Josefien J F ; Zamperoni, Victoria ; South, Emily ; Uphoff, Eleonora P ; Gilbody, Simon ; Bockting, Claudi L H ; Churchill, Rachel ; Kousoulis, Antonis A</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract
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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1101-1262</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-360X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckz233</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32236548</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Adults ; Balances (scales) ; Cultural sensitivity ; Epidemiology ; Evaluation ; Harmonization ; Health problems ; Mental depression ; Mental disorders ; Mental health ; Prevention ; Property ; Public health ; Reliability ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>European journal of public health, 2020-06, Vol.30 (3), p.510-516</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved. 2020</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-3addbd24cb19b26caab6141cda34a9ce8d50a017fd0c7b6ecbb2e18c7aa33c963</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-3addbd24cb19b26caab6141cda34a9ce8d50a017fd0c7b6ecbb2e18c7aa33c963</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9759-2502</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1599,27847,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckz233$$EView_record_in_Oxford_University_Press$$FView_record_in_$$GOxford_University_Press</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32236548$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Breedvelt, Josefien J F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zamperoni, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>South, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uphoff, Eleonora P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilbody, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bockting, Claudi L H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Churchill, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kousoulis, Antonis A</creatorcontrib><title>A systematic review of mental health measurement scales for evaluating the effects of mental health prevention interventions</title><title>European journal of public health</title><addtitle>Eur J Public Health</addtitle><description>Abstract
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.</description><subject>Adults</subject><subject>Balances (scales)</subject><subject>Cultural sensitivity</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Harmonization</subject><subject>Health problems</subject><subject>Mental depression</subject><subject>Mental disorders</subject><subject>Mental health</subject><subject>Prevention</subject><subject>Property</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Reliability</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>1101-1262</issn><issn>1464-360X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUlr3EAQhZsQY4-Xo6-hIRdflOlNLek4DPEChlxs8E1Ut0oZOdrSywSH_Pi0mXEM8cGnqnp89argEXLO2RfOKrnE6OZolvbHbyHlB7LgSqtMavbwMfWc8YwLLY7IsfePjLG8KMUhOZJCSJ2rckH-rKh_8gEHCJ2lDrcd_qJTSwccA_R0g9CHTZrAR4fPIvUWevS0nRzFLfQxLY7fadggxbZFG_zb9Tn5JqGbRtqNAd1-8KfkoIXe49m-npD7y6936-vs9tvVzXp1m1mVVyGT0DSmEcoaXhmhLYDRXHHbgFRQWSybnAHjRdswWxiN1hiBvLQFgJS20vKEXOx8Zzf9jOhDPXTeYt_DiFP0tZBlXrBCiyKhn_9DH6foxvRdLZRMR4RSPFHZjrJu8t5hW8-uG8A91ZzVz7HUu1jqXSyJ_7R3jWbA5h_9ksPrh1Oc3_H6C4BznHk</recordid><startdate>20200601</startdate><enddate>20200601</enddate><creator>Breedvelt, Josefien J F</creator><creator>Zamperoni, Victoria</creator><creator>South, Emily</creator><creator>Uphoff, Eleonora P</creator><creator>Gilbody, Simon</creator><creator>Bockting, Claudi L H</creator><creator>Churchill, Rachel</creator><creator>Kousoulis, Antonis A</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9759-2502</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200601</creationdate><title>A systematic review of mental health measurement scales for evaluating the effects of mental health prevention interventions</title><author>Breedvelt, Josefien J F ; Zamperoni, Victoria ; South, Emily ; Uphoff, Eleonora P ; Gilbody, Simon ; Bockting, Claudi L H ; Churchill, Rachel ; Kousoulis, Antonis A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-3addbd24cb19b26caab6141cda34a9ce8d50a017fd0c7b6ecbb2e18c7aa33c963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Adults</topic><topic>Balances (scales)</topic><topic>Cultural sensitivity</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Harmonization</topic><topic>Health problems</topic><topic>Mental depression</topic><topic>Mental disorders</topic><topic>Mental health</topic><topic>Prevention</topic><topic>Property</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Reliability</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Breedvelt, Josefien J F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zamperoni, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>South, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uphoff, Eleonora P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilbody, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bockting, Claudi L H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Churchill, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kousoulis, Antonis A</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of public health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Breedvelt, Josefien J F</au><au>Zamperoni, Victoria</au><au>South, Emily</au><au>Uphoff, Eleonora P</au><au>Gilbody, Simon</au><au>Bockting, Claudi L H</au><au>Churchill, Rachel</au><au>Kousoulis, Antonis A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A systematic review of mental health measurement scales for evaluating the effects of mental health prevention interventions</atitle><jtitle>European journal of public health</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Public Health</addtitle><date>2020-06-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>510</spage><epage>516</epage><pages>510-516</pages><issn>1101-1262</issn><eissn>1464-360X</eissn><abstract>Abstract
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.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>32236548</pmid><doi>10.1093/eurpub/ckz233</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9759-2502</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| identifier | ISSN: 1101-1262 |
| ispartof | European journal of public health, 2020-06, Vol.30 (3), p.510-516 |
| issn | 1101-1262 1464-360X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2385707627 |
| source | Oxford Journals Open Access Collection |
| subjects | Adults Balances (scales) Cultural sensitivity Epidemiology Evaluation Harmonization Health problems Mental depression Mental disorders Mental health Prevention Property Public health Reliability Systematic review |
| title | A systematic review of mental health measurement scales for evaluating the effects of mental health prevention interventions |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T03%3A15%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_TOX&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20systematic%20review%20of%20mental%20health%20measurement%20scales%20for%20evaluating%20the%20effects%20of%20mental%20health%20prevention%20interventions&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20public%20health&rft.au=Breedvelt,%20Josefien%20J%20F&rft.date=2020-06-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=510&rft.epage=516&rft.pages=510-516&rft.issn=1101-1262&rft.eissn=1464-360X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/eurpub/ckz233&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_TOX%3E2430172441%3C/proquest_TOX%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2430172441&rft_id=info:pmid/32236548&rft_oup_id=10.1093/eurpub/ckz233&rfr_iscdi=true |