ArticleInternational journal of mental health nursing2022
Measuring mental health recovery: Cross-cultural adaptation of the 15-item Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery in Spain (QPR-15-SP).
Article in International journal of mental health nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Mental Health Recovery Process Through Art: An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Multi-Center Study of an Art-Based Community Project.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of a Spanish version of the Maryland Assessment of Recovery Scale (MARS-12).PloS one · 2024Article
- Psychometric validation of the 15-item Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery in Spain (QPR-15-SP).Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Mental health services need reliable and valid instruments to measure mental health recovery outcomes, and the only available one in Spanish is arduous. Adapting an instrument is more efficient than creating a new one as it enables international comparison research. The aim of this study was to conduct a cross-cultural adaptation of the 15-item Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery. Fifty-four participants engaged in a five-stage systematic and standardized process carried out from November 2019 to November 2020. Professional translators (n = 4) from the Translation Service Center for Foreign Languages of the Universidad de Alcalá participated in the direct translation, synthesis and back translation stages, and mental health professionals (n = 33) and service users (n = 17) from the Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga and the Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Victoria in Andalucía (Spain), with an average of 19.2 (SD 12.86) years of experience in mental health, participated in the committee of experts and pilot debriefing stages. Additionally, legibility was assessed. Out of the 15-items of the questionnaire, three (20%) were equal amongst translations, three items (20%) of the back translations matched the original questionnaire and discrepancies identified were adapted accordingly. Seven items (46.7%) were approved online by experts and consensus of alternative translations was reached for the rest. The average time spent completing the questionnaire by service users during the face-to-face pilot was 4.12 min (SD 2.25). Internal consistency obtained was ω = 0.95 and α = 0.91. Debriefing findings reported the questionnaire as comprehensible (97.1%), adequate in wording (91.2%), formal in language (55.9%) and adequate in terms of length (100%). The questionnaire scored 65.53, 'normal' readability, on the Inflesz scale. The adapted instrument has conceptual, linguistic, cultural and metric equivalence to the original instrument.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.