ArticleCanadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie2024
Article in Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThere are few tools capable of measuring the personal recovery of individuals presenting with mental disorders that take into account the various dimensions of recovery. Personal recovery encompasses several objectives at the level of autonomy, positive interpersonal relationships, mental and physical health, self-acceptance, the school/professional domain, as well as developing a life project. A team of practitioners and researchers from four countries (Canada, Belgium, France, and Switzerland) adapted the Client Assessment of Strengths, Interests, and Goals (CASIG) tool to more accurately measure these different aspects of personal recovery. This study aims to validate the revised version of CASIG (CASIG-rev) in French, in terms of construct validity, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and clinical sensitivity to change.
methodA total of 272 individuals were recruited across different French-speaking countries to respond to the CASIG-rev online, as well as Ryff's well-being measure, the Recovery Assessment Scale, and the WHODAS. A subgroup of 29 individuals responded again to the CASIG-rev after 1 month (for temporal stability), and 24 again at six months (for sensitivity to change).
resultsThe confirmatory factor analysis suggests a 5-factor model, very similar to the initially proposed model of 6 factors. Convergent validity was demonstrated between the subscales of tools measuring similar concepts, and test-retest reliability was proven for the majority of scales. The CASIG-rev also appears to be sensitive to clinical or rehabilitation changes, notably at the level of the life project.
conclusionThis study supports the use of the CASIG-rev in French to measure the recovery of individuals presenting with mental disorders, as well as to support practitioners in the evaluation of their programs and interventions. Limitations, as well as the tool's relevance, are presented. An English validation is underway to make the CASIG-rev available in Anglo-Saxon countries.
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.