| Title |
Factor Structure and Sensitivity to Change of the Recovery Assessment Scale
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11414-017-9563-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Salene M. W. Jones, Evette J. Ludman |
| Abstract |
The focus on recovery, not just symptom reduction, in mental health care brings a need for psychometrically sound measures of recovery. This study examined the factor structure and sensitivity to change of a common measure of mental health recovery, the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS). We conducted a secondary data analysis from a randomized clinical trial of self-management for depression (n = 302). We tested both bifactor and the previously found five-factor model. Sensitivity to change was examined three ways: (1) between the intervention and control group; (2) across time in the intervention group; and (3) in those whose depression remitted. The previous five-factor model was supported. One subscale, no domination by symptoms, was particularly sensitive to change and showed sensitivity to change whereas the subscale reliance on others did not show change in any of the comparisons. Results suggest that the subscales of the RAS should be examined separately in future studies of recovery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Researcher | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 21 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 13 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 24 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 July 2017.
All research outputs
#18,729,245
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
#432
of 469 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,114
of 317,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 469 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 317,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.