Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35590299›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2022

The Active Recovery Triad monitor: evaluation of a model fidelity scale for recovery-oriented care in long-term mental health care settings.

Lieke Johanna Cornelia Zomer, Lisette van der Meer, Jaap van Weeghel, Anne Laura van Melle, Henrica Cornelia Wilhelmina de Vet, Martijn Kemper, Guy Antoine Marie Widdershoven, Yolande Voskes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Lieke Johanna Cornelia ZomerDepartment of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. l.zomer@amsterdamumc.nl.
Lisette van der MeerDepartment of Clinical & Developmental Neuropsychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Jaap van WeeghelTranzo Scientific Center for Care and Wellbeing, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands.
Anne Laura van MelleDepartment of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Henrica Cornelia Wilhelmina de VetDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Martijn KemperVanuit de Grond, Haarlem, the Netherlands.
Guy Antoine Marie WiddershovenDepartment of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Yolande VoskesDepartment of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe Active Recovery Triad (ART) model is a recently developed care model for people who are admitted to an institutional setting for several years and receive 24-h mental health care and support. This study focuses on the ART monitor, a model fidelity scale that measures the degree of compliance with the ART model. Our aim is to evaluate the psychometric properties of the ART monitor and to further improve the instrument.

methodsFifteen teams at the start (n = 7, group 1) or in the process (6 months to three years) of implementing care according to the ART model (n = 8, group 2) were audited using the ART monitor. Auditors were trained care workers, peer workers, and family peer workers. Auditors and team members provided feedback on the instrument. The content validity, construct validity and inter-rater reliability of the ART monitor were investigated. Based on the outcomes of these psychometric properties, the ART monitor was finalized.

resultsRegarding content validity, auditors and teams indicated that they perceived the ART monitor to be a useful instrument. In terms of construct validity, a significant difference (t(13) = 2.53, p < 0.05) was found between teams at the start of the implementation process (group 1, average score of 2.42 (SD = 0.44)) and teams with a longer duration of implementation (group 2, average score of 2.95 (SD = 0.37)). When allowing for a one-point difference in scores, 88% of the items had an inter-rater agreement over 65%. Items with a relatively low inter-rater reliability, in combination with feedback from auditors and teams regarding content validity, provided direction for further improvement and revision of the instrument.

conclusionsWe concluded that the revised ART monitor is feasible and useful in mental health care practice. However, further evaluation of its psychometric properties will be needed.

Indexed as

Long-Term CareMental HealthHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsART modelLong-term mental health careModel fidelity scalePsychometric properties

Identifiers

PMID35590299
PMCPMC9118770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.