Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of Illness Management and Recovery Scale‐Patient form

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to provide the Turkish version of the Illness Management and Recovery Scale-Patient (IMRS-P) form and to determine its psychometric properties. Design and Methods: This is a descriptive and correlation study. The sample of this study consisted of 75 people with schizophrenia. Translation and content validity, confirmatory factor analyses were used to test the validity and reliability of the scales. Results: The content validity index was found to be 0.93. The scale had a threefactor structure, which subscales were 0.69 for recovery, 0.69 for management, and 0.35 for substance. The Cronbach's alpha was determined as 0.76. Practice Implications: The Turkish version of the IMRS-P form is a valid and reliable scale for Turkish patients.

Assessing the Psychometric Properties of the Illness Management and Recovery Scale: A Systematic Review Using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN)

“…According to Bland criteria [64], the IMR-S achieves acceptable values of internal consistency when its total score is considered, being a satisfactory value for group comparison. However, the internal consistency values in studies that analyze the three-factor structure [15,18,27,45,47,50,53] and reported alpha values for each subscale were only moderate. Therefore, a more detailed analysis of individual scale items and of the factors or dimensions identified in previous studies [27,45] should be conducted.…”

“…Although these three studies agree on the overall structure of the IMR-S in terms of the number of factors, they differ regarding which items belong to each of the three factors. The different approaches to analyze the structural validity (Exploratory Factor Analysis [45], Confirmatory Factor Analysis [27], and Rasch measurement model [53]) might explain the heterogeneous findings in dimensionality.…”

“…This study was graded as being of doubtful methodological quality because it only provided information from clinicians regarding the relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of the client version scale. Additionally, and because only a specific group of professionals (i.e., nurses) was consulted [53], the quality of evidence for content validity was graded as low. However, it should be noted that the IMR-S is based on the retrieval model, so although it is necessary to provide evidence of content validity in terms of understanding by users themselves, from the point of view of construct validity, this study provides sufficient evidence.…”

Reliability and validity of the Mental Health Self-management Questionnaire among Chinese patients with mood and anxiety disorders

“…Moreover, the Illness Management and Recovery Scales (IMRS) (28)(29)(30), the Mental Health Recovery Measure (MHRM) (31-33), the Patient Activation Measure for Mental Health (PAM-MH) (34,35), the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) (36-38), the Mental Health Confidence Scale (MHCS) (39)(40)(41), the Task-Specific Self-Efficacy Scale (TSSES) (42), and the Schizophrenia Self-Management Instrument Scale (SSMIS) (43) are used widely in self-management programs in the mental health field, although most of them were not designed to assess self-management behaviors. Furthermore, only the TSSES and SSMIS were developed using Chinese patients; the IMRS and RAS had Chinese versions.…”