ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2024
Development and content validation of a questionnaire to assess the social determinants of mental health in clinical practice.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: There is growing consensus that consideration of the Social Determinants of Mental Health should be at the centre of mental health care provision. To facilitate this, a validated means to assess mental health service users' social contextual information is arguably needed. We therefore developed a questionnaire to assess the Social Determinants of Mental Health in clinical practice. Methods: Our guideline-informed development consisted of three steps; i) construct and purpose definition, ii) initial item generation based on the literature, similar questionnaires, and a selection of the ICD-10, iii) evaluation, revision, and content validation of the questionnaire. Initially we developed 249 items that were reduced, revised, and validated in several stages to 73 items. Content validation of the questionnaire was achieved through surveys and focus groups including mental health care service users and professionals. Results: The surveys and focus groups indicated the need for a standardised assessment of adverse social factors and highlighted that the benefits of such an assessment would be a more holistic approach to identifying and addressing fundamental factors involved in the development of mental health difficulties. Importantly, this study also revealed how any assessment of the Social Determinants of Mental Health must prioritise the assessed person having a central role in the process and control over their own data. The focus groups identified contradicting recommendations regarding the most suitable context to administer the questionnaire. Discussion: The resulting questionnaire can be considered to be theoretically robust and partially validated. Future research is discussed.
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.