↓ Skip to main content

Developing a measure of mental health service satisfaction for use in low income countries: a mixed methods study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
Title
Developing a measure of mental health service satisfaction for use in low income countries: a mixed methods study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2126-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rosie Mayston, Kassahun Habtamu, Girmay Medhin, Atalay Alem, Abebaw Fekadu, Alehegn Habtamu, Martin Prince, Charlotte Hanlon

Abstract

Service satisfaction is integral to quality of care and measures are therefore considered important indicators of quality. Patient's responses to their experiences of using services are under-researched in the context of mental healthcare in low income countries. Our aim was to use mixed methods to develop a new measure of satisfaction for use among consumers of the new models of mental healthcare which are currently being scaled-up. We used qualitative methods to explore the concept of service satisfaction. On the basis of these findings, we developed a new 'Mental health service satisfaction scale' (MHSSS v0.0) by adapting existing measures of service satisfaction. We evaluated psychometric properties of the new measure, among a sample of service users with severe mental disorder (SMD) (n = 200) and caregivers (n = 200). Following expert review, a modified version of the measure was developed (MHSSS v1.0) and psychometric properties were examined with data from a second independent sample (n = 150 service users with SMD and n = 150 caregivers). Factors identified in analysis of the first quantitative sample coincide with core concepts of service satisfaction as reported in the literature and were reflected in the key themes which emerged from our qualitative study: interpersonal factors, efficacy, communication, technical competency and adequacy of facilities. There was generally consensus among caregivers and service users regarding dimensions of satisfaction. However there was evidence of some differences in prioritization. Revisions made to version 0.0 of the Mental Health Service Satisfaction Scale (MHSSS) led to an improved instrument, with excellent internal consistency, convergent validity and factor loadings indicative of a uni-dimensional construct. Our findings suggest that conceptions of service satisfaction among people accessing a service for SMD are broadly similar with those established in the literature. Our findings indicate that the MHSSS might be a useful candidate for inclusion in the new toolkit of measures needed to facilitate monitoring of service satisfaction which will be crucial to quality improvement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 141 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Researcher 9 6%
Other 27 19%
Unknown 39 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 13%
Psychology 14 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 5%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 51 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2017.
All research outputs
#13,192,260
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,436
of 7,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,275
of 307,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#89
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,688 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 159 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.