Psychometric validation of the <i>Clubhouse climate questionnaire</i> as an autonomy support measure for people with severe mental illness

Fitzgerald, Sandra; Umucu, Emre; Arora, Simran; Huck, Garrett E.; Benton, Susan Flowers; Chan, Fong

doi:10.3109/09638237.2014.973103

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 ( strongly agree ) to 5 ( strongly disagree ). A high internal consistency reliability estimate (Cronbach’s α = .94) was reported for the VSES (Fitzgerald, 2014). The VSES had a Cronbach’s alpha of .96 in this study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…The PVES requires that participants rate their level of agreement on 12 statements that completed the sentence, “Completing my vocational rehabilitation program will likely allow me to”; one example of an item reflecting a positive outcome was, “have a job with good pay and benefits.” Each item is rated using a 5-point Likert-type agreement scale ranging from 1 ( strongly disagree ) to 5 ( strongly agree ). The Cronbach’s alpha for the PVES was reported to be .79 (Fitzgerald, 2014). The PVES had a Cronbach’s alpha of .96 in this study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing Vocational Rehabilitation Engagement of People With Disabilities

Dutta¹,

Chan

Kundu³

et al. 2016

Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Vocational Rehabilitation Engagement of People With Disabilities

Dutta¹,

Chan

Kundu³

et al. 2016

Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Articles describing program level outcomes such as Clubhouse costs and did not offer data on the outcomes of interest described above (Daniilidis 2014 ; Fitzgerald 2013; Fitzgerald et al 2015a , b ; Labun et al 2012 ; Lesley and Livingood 2015 ; McKay et al 2007 ; Plotnick and Salzer 2008 ; Pernice-Duca et al 2015 , 2010 ; Tanaka 2013 ; Tanaka et al 2015 ; Tanaka and Davidson 2015 ; Torres Stone et al 2015 ).…”

Section: Appendix A: Articles Excludedmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Evidence for the Clubhouse Model of Psychosocial Rehabilitation

McKay

Nugent

Johnsen

et al. 2016

Adm Policy Ment Health

123

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Clubhouse Model has been in existence for over sixty-five years; however, a review that synthesizes the literature on the model is needed. The current study makes use of the existing research to conduct a systematic review of articles providing a comprehensive understanding of what is known about the Clubhouse Model, to identify the best evidence available, as well as areas that would benefit from further study. Findings are summarized and evidence is classified by outcome domains. Fifty-two articles met the selection criteria of Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT’s), quasi-experimental studies, or observational studies for domains of employment (N = 29); quality of life/satisfaction (N = 10); reductions in psychiatric hospitalization(s) (N = 10); social relationships (N = 10); education (N = 3); and health promotion activities (N = 2). RCT results support the efficacy of the Clubhouse Model in promoting employment, reducing hospitalization(s), and improving quality of life. Quasi-experimental and observational studies offer support in education and social domains. The findings from this review indicate that Clubhouses are a promising practice but additional studies using rigorous methods that report the strength of the outcomes are needed to evaluate Clubhouse programs with fidelity to the Clubhouse Model.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10488-016-0760-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…The Journal of Mental Health traditionally encourages and supports research in applied psychometrics (Cao et al, 2016;Fitzgerald et al, 2017;Lloyd & Devine, 2012;O'Connor et al, 2014;Roncalli et al, 2013, among others). This special issue adds to this effort and presents a variety of different research scenarios often occurring in applied psychometrics.…”

Section: Psychometrics In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%