↓ Skip to main content

The Japanese version of the questionnaire about the process of recovery: development and validity and reliability testing

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Japanese version of the questionnaire about the process of recovery: development and validity and reliability testing
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12888-017-1520-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Akiko Kanehara, Risa Kotake, Yuki Miyamoto, Yousuke Kumakura, Kentaro Morita, Tomoko Ishiura, Kimiko Shimizu, Yumiko Fujieda, Shuntaro Ando, Shinsuke Kondo, Kiyoto Kasai

Abstract

Personal recovery is increasingly recognised as an important outcome measure in mental health services. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR-J) and test its validity and reliability. The study comprised two stages that employed the cross-sectional and prospective cohort designs, respectively. We translated the questionnaire using a standard translation/back-translation method. Convergent validity was examined by calculating Pearson's correlation coefficients with scores on the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) and the Short-Form-8 Health Survey (SF-8). An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to examine factorial validity. We used intraclass correlation and Cronbach's alpha to examine the test-retest and internal consistency reliability of the QPR-J's 22-item full scale, 17-item intrapersonal and 5-item interpersonal subscales. We conducted an EFA along with a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Data were obtained from 197 users of mental health services (mean age: 42.0 years; 61.9% female; 49.2% diagnosed with schizophrenia). The QPR-J showed adequate convergent validity, exhibiting significant, positive correlations with the RAS and SF-8 scores. The QPR-J's full version, subscales, showed excellent test-retest and internal consistency reliability, with the exception of acceptable but relatively low internal consistency reliability for the interpersonal subscale. Based on the results of the CFA and EFA, we adopted the factor structure extracted from the original 2-factor model based on the present CFA. The QPR-J is an adequately valid and reliable measure of the process of recovery among Japanese users with mental health services.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Student > Master 7 11%
Other 5 8%
Researcher 5 8%
Other 15 24%
Unknown 12 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 26%
Psychology 14 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 13%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 16 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 23 December 2017.
All research outputs
#2,139,656
of 15,922,434 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#860
of 3,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,862
of 324,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#92
of 379 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,922,434 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,572 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
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 324,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 379 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.