ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
The mental-health patient-activation measure: assessing validity, reliability, and responsiveness in outpatient settings.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalisation of the Dutch combined lifestyle intervention SLIMMER improves participant retention and weight loss in people at risk for cardiometabolic disease.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Patient Activation and Diabetes Outcomes Among Jordanian Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Longitudinal Evidence on Adherence and Glycemic Control With Linear Mixed Model Analysis.Research in nursing & health · 2026Article
- Self-management positivity and its influencing factors among lung cancer patients: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
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
introductionThe patient activation measure-mental health (PAM-MH) scale, adapted from the Patient Activation Measure-13 Items (PAM-13) developed in the United States, was designed to assess patient engagement and activation in mental health care. Despite initial validation of the PAM-MH in its original context, its applicability in other settings and its comparison to the gold standard PAM-13 remain unexplored. Furthermore, research addressing the face and construct validity of the PAM-MH is limited. This multi-phase study evaluated the face validity, construct validity, reliability and responsiveness of the PAM-MH in a Norwegian outpatient setting.
methodsA participatory approach was adopted to actively involve user representatives in validating the scale. The validation process consisted of four interconnected studies. In the first sub-study, user representatives were invited to contribute to establish face validity by providing quantitative feedback on the perceived value and burden of completing the PAM-MH. The second sub-study examined the construct validity. It was hypothesised that the PAM-MH measures the construct of patient activation and would therefore correlate with the PAM-13. This hypothesis was tested using Pearson's r in a sample of 55 outpatients. The third sub-study evaluated test-retest reliability (via ICC) and internal consistency (using Cronbach's α), in a sample of 27 outpatients who completed the PAM-MH on two separate occasions. The final sub-study explored the responsiveness of the scale to change, guided by predefined hypotheses, in a sample of 11 outpatients.
resultsAdequate acceptability was established from users' views of the value and burden of the scale (overall mean "value" score was 59.7% and mean "burden" was 39.6%). All hypotheses, established a priori for construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness-to-change, were confirmed.
conclusionThis multi-phase study employed a participatory approach to validate the PAM-MH in a Norwegian outpatient context. Preliminary results demonstrated satisfactory face validity and construct validity, along with good reliability and responsiveness-to-change. The findings suggest that the PAM-MH is both valid and reliable, making it a suitable questionnaire to measure patient activation in a Norwegian outpatient setting.
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.