ArticleThe British journal of clinical psychology2025
Validation of a transdiagnostic measure of fears of recurrence and progression about mental health conditions.
Article in The British journal of clinical psychology, 2025. 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.
- Validation of a transdiagnostic measure of fears of recurrence and progression about mental health conditions.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesFears of recurrence and progression (FORP) in people with mental health conditions are understudied despite predicting poorer psychological outcomes and increased rates of relapse. However, there are no well-validated questionnaires that assess FORP in people with non-psychotic conditions. Moreover, it is not known whether FORP is empirically distinct from mental health anxiety.
designOnline survey collected data at two time points.
methodA 40-item FORP About Mental Health Questionnaire (FORP-MHQ) was derived from lived experience interviews. Analyses were conducted with a sample of 865 people with different mental health conditions. Exploratory factor analysis in a randomly split sub-sample (N = 432) yielded a 10-item, single-factor structure that measures FORP severity. Confirmatory factor analysis on these items was conducted in the remaining sample (N = 433). Discriminant and convergent validity, and reliability, analyses were conducted in the complete sample. Measurement invariance was assessed between men and women, those with and without a history of psychosis or mania, and those with and without diagnoses across different diagnostic categories.
resultsThe 10-item FORP-MHQ demonstrated good structural, convergent and concurrent validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. It was also empirically distinct from mental health anxiety with good discriminant validity. The FORP-MHQ was invariant between men and women, those with and without a history of psychosis or mania, and those with and without diagnoses across diagnostic categories.
conclusionThe FORP-MHQ is a valid and reliable tool to assess FORP in people with a range of different mental health conditions, both psychotic and non-psychotic.
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.