Capabilities Approach: Contextualizing Participants’ Perspectives on Systems Barriers to Recovery

Petros, Ryan; Solomon, Phyllis; Linz, Sheila; DeCesaris, Marissa; Hanrahan, Nancy P.

doi:10.1080/00207411.2016.1238742

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As persons form an increasingly complex sense of themselves awareness of loss linked with SMI may emerge and persons may struggle to replace comfortable, albeit stigmatized, ideas about themselves. Pain with meaning making may also emerge due to the real implications of stigma and the ways in which people with SMI are marginalized [115], as well as the increased rates of depression and suicide in individuals who experience SMI [116]. Thus, treatment must consider these forms of transformation as complex and unpredictable.…”

Section: Expert Commentarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovery and serious mental illness: a review of current clinical and research paradigms and future directions

Leonhardt

Huling

Hamm

et al. 2017

Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics

159

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recovery from serious mental illness has historically not been considered a likely or even possible outcome. However, a range of evidence suggests the courses of SMI are heterogeneous with recovery being the most likely outcome. One barrier to studying recovery in SMI is that recovery has been operationalized in divergent and seemingly incompatible ways: as an objective outcome versus a subjective process. Areas covered: This paper offers a review of recovery as a subjective process and recovery as an objective outcome; contrasts methodologies utilized by each approach to assess recovery; reports rates and correlates of recovery; and explores the relationship between objective and subjective forms of recovery. Expert commentary: There are two commonalities of approaching recovery as a subjective process and an objective outcome: (i) the need to make meaning out of one's experiences to engage in either type of recovery and (ii) there exist many threats to engaging in meaning making that may impact the likelihood of moving toward recovery. We offer four clinical implications that stem from these two commonalities within a divided approach to the concept of recovery from SMI.

show abstract

Section: Expert Commentarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovery and serious mental illness: a review of current clinical and research paradigms and future directions

Leonhardt

Huling

Hamm

et al. 2017

Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics

159

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All identified questionnaires are constructed for self-completion and use subjective measures to assess capabilities. [28,75], and 8 reported results of actual measurements of health-related capabilities [23,24,27,41,[44][45][46][47]. The remaining (n = 14) articles had a mixed focus: on development/measurement (n = 2) [25,26], development/psychometric properties (n = 9) [29, 30, 36-38, 43, 51, 53, 62], or comparison/psychometric properties (n = 3) [59,60,73].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Articles reporting on studies that directly measured capabilities without developing or validating any tools for future use were only found among the qualitative studies and secondary data analyses. Qualitative measurement was performed either by semi-structured interviews [23][24][25][26], observation [24] or video analysis [27], while secondary data was analyzed via methods such as regression [41] or equation modelling [44].…”

Section: Main Aims and Methods Employedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sample sizes among the qualitative and mixed methods approaches varied between n = 12 [27] and n = 64 [26], while numbers were naturally [45] and n = 25,180 [44]). Target groups varied widely, from adults in general [24,32,35,41,78], children under the age of two [26], young adults [44] and older adults [25,31,46], to adults with special conditions or characteristics [23,27,[36][37][38][39][40] or only women [45]. Sample sizes for the identified questionnaires varied substantially, ranging from n = 10 [30] to n = 2501 [70].…”

Section: Measurement Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measuring capabilities in health and physical activity promotion: a systematic review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The capability approach by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum has gained increasing attention in the field of public health. As it combines individual, social and structural factors and shifts the focus of attention from the actual behavior towards available options for health behaviors that people can actually choose from, it may help advance our understanding of complex health issues. Objectives The aim of this article is to identify and describe tools available to measure capabilities within the context of health, with a specific focus on capabilities for health-enhancing physical activity. Method We conducted a systematic literature review using 11 databases covering scientific journal articles published in English or German between the years 2000 and 2020 with a focus on capabilities for health or physical activity. Results We found a total of 51 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Four articles measured capabilities using qualitative methods, one combined qualitative and quantitative methods, while the rest used quantitative methods. We identified a total 11 different capability questionnaires, all showing moderate to good validity/reliability. Only one questionnaire and one interview-based tool specifically dealt with capabilities for health enhancing physical activity. Conclusion Although we were able to identify measurement tools for capabilities in health, this review has shown that there is no generic tool available for the measurement across all population- and age-groups, and tools focusing on physical activity are scarce. However, our results can be used as guide for future projects that aim at measuring capabilities.

show abstract

“…Articles reporting on studies that directly measured capabilities without developing or validating any tools for future use were only found among the qualitative studies and secondary data analyses. Qualitative measurement was performed either by semi-structured interviews [45][46][47], observation [46] or video analysis [47], while secondary data was analyzed via methods such as regression [14] or equation modelling [48].…”

Section: Main Aims and Methods Employedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring capabilities in health and physical activity promotion: a systematic review.

Till

Abu‐Omar

Ferschl

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The capability approach by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum has gained increasing attention in the field of public health. As it combines individual, social and structural factors and shifts the focus of attention from the actual behavior towards available options for health behaviors that people can actually choose from, it may help advance our understanding of complex health issues. Objectives: The aim of this article is to identify and describe tools available to measure capabilities within the context of health, with a specific focus on capabilities for health-enhancing physical activity. Method: We conducted a systematic literature review using 11 databases covering scientific journal articles published in English or German between the years 2000 and 2019 with a focus on capabilities for health or physical activity.Results: We found a total of 44 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Four articles measured capabilities using qualitative methods, one combined qualitative and quantitative methods, while the rest used quantitative methods. We identified a total 11 different capability questionnaires, all showing moderate to good validity/reliability. Only one questionnaire and one interview-based tool specifically dealt with capabilities for health enhancing physical activity.Conclusion: Although we were able to identify measurement tools for capabilities in health, this review has shown that there is no generic tool available for the measurement across all population- and age-groups, and tools focusing on physical activity are scarce. However, our results can be used as guide for future projects that aim at measuring capabilities.

show abstract

Capabilities Approach: Contextualizing Participants’ Perspectives on Systems Barriers to Recovery

Cited by 5 publications

References 19 publications

Recovery and serious mental illness: a review of current clinical and research paradigms and future directions

Recovery and serious mental illness: a review of current clinical and research paradigms and future directions

Measuring capabilities in health and physical activity promotion: a systematic review

Measuring capabilities in health and physical activity promotion: a systematic review.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About