Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR)

  • Julie Williams (a1), Mary Leamy (a1), Francesca Pesola (a1), Victoria Bird (a1), Clair Le Boutillier (a1) and Mike Slade (a1)...
Abstract
Background

Supporting recovery is the aim of national mental health policy in many countries. However, only one measure of recovery has been developed in England: the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR), which measures recovery from the perspective of adult mental health service users with a psychosis diagnosis.

Aims

To independently evaluate the psychometric properties of the 15- and 22-item versions of the QPR.

Method

Two samples were used: data-set 1 (n = 88) involved assessment of the QPR at baseline, 2 weeks and 3 months. Data-set 2 (n = 399; trial registration: ISRCTN02507940) involved assessment of the QPR at baseline and 1 year.

Results

For the 15-item version, internal consistency was 0.89, convergent validity was 0.73, test–retest reliability was 0.74 and sensitivity to change was 0.40. Confirmatory factor analysis showed the 15-item version offered a good fit. For the 22-item version, the interpersonal subscale was found to underperform and the intrapersonal subscale overlaps substantially with the 15-item version.

Conclusions

Both the 15-item and the intrapersonal subscale of the 22-item versions of the QPR demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties. The 15-item version is slightly more robust and also less burdensome, so it can be recommended for use in research and clinical practice.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR)
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR)
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR)
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
Julie Williams, Health Service and Population Research Department (Box P029), Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF. Email: julie.williams@kcl.ac.uk
Footnotes
Hide All

Declaration of interest

None.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
1 Anthony, W. Recovery from mental illness: the guiding vision of the mental health service system in the 1990s. Psychosoc Rehab J 1993; 16: 1123.
2 Department of Health. No Health Without Mental Health: A Cross-Government Mental Health Outcomes Strategy for People of all Ages. Department of Health, 2011.
3 Leamy, M, Slade, M, Le Boutillier, C, Williams, J, Bird, V. A conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis. Br J Psychiatry 2011; 199: 445–52.
4 Le Boutillier, C, Leamy, M, Bird, V, Davidson, L, Williams, J, Slade, M. What does recovery mean in practice? A qualitative analysis of international recovery-oriented practice guidance. Psychiatr Serv 2011; 62: 1470–6.
5 Shanks, V, Williams, J, Leamy, M, Bird, V, Le Boutillier, C, Slade, M. Measures of personal recovery: a systematic review. Psychiatr Serv 2013; 64: 974–80.
6 Sklar, M, Groessl, E, O'Connell, M, Davidson, L, Aarons, GA. Instruments for measuring mental health recovery: a systematic review. Clin Psychol Rev 2013; 33: 1082–95.
7 Neil, S, Kilbride, M, Pitt, L, Nothard, S, Welford, M, Sellwood, W, et al. The questionnaire about the process of recovery (QPR): a measurement tool developed in collaboration with service users. Psychosis 2009; 1: 111.
8 Law, H, Neil, S, Dunn, G, Morrison, A. Psychometric properties of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR). Schizophr Res 2014; 156: 184–9.
9 Slade, M, Bird, V, Le Boutillier, C, Williams, J, McCrone, P, Leamy, M. REFOCUS trial: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial of a pro-recovery intervention within community based mental health teams. BMC Psychiatry 2011; 11: 185.
10 Corrigan, P, Giffort, D, Rashid, F, Leary, M, Okeke, I. Recovery as a psychological construct. Community Ment Health J 1999; 35: 231–9.
11 Tennant, R, Hiller, L, Fishwick, R, Platt, S, Joseph, S, Weich, S, et al. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health QuaL Life Outcomes 2007; 5: 63.
12 Maheswaran, H, Weich, S, Powell, J, Stewart-Brown, S. Evaluating the responsiveness of the Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS): group and individual level analysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2012; 10: 156.
13 Muthén, L, Muthén, B. Mplus User's Guide. Muthén and Muthén, 1998–2011.
14 Costello, A, Osborne, J. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assess Res Eval 2005; 10: 19.
15 Lykken, D, Tellegen, A. Happiness is a stochastic phenomemon. Psychol Sci 1996; 7: 186–9.
16 Shepherd, G, Boardman, J, Rinaldi, M, Roberts, G. Supporting Recovery in Mental Health Services: Quality and Outcomes. Centre for Mental Health, NHS Confederation, 2014.
17 Williams, J, Leamy, M, Bird, V, Le Boutiller, C, Norton, S, Pesola, F, et al. Development and evaluation of the INSPIRE measure of staff support for personal recovery. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2015; 50: 777–86.
18 McCabe, R, Saidi, M, Priebe, S. Patient-reported outcomes in schizophrenia. Br J Psychiatry 2007; 191 (suppl 50): s218.
19 Andresen, R, Caputi, P, Oades, L. Do clinical outcome measures assess consumer-defined recovery? Psychiatry Res 2010; 177: 309–17.
20 Burgess, P, Pirkis, J, Coombs, T, Rosen, A. Assessing the value of existing recovery measures for routine use in Australian mental health services. Aust NZ J Psychiatry 2011; 45: 114.
21 Reininghaus, U, Priebe, S. Measuring patient-reported outcomes in psychosis: conceptual and methodological review. Br J Psychiatry 2012; 201: 262–7.
22 Crawford, M, Robotham, D, Thana, L, Patterson, S, Weaver, T, Barber, R, et al. Selecting outcome measures in mental health: the views of service users. J Ment Health 2011; 20: 336–46.
23 Slade, M, Thornicroft, G, Glover, G. The feasibility of routine outcome measures in mental health. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 1999; 34: 243–9.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The British Journal of Psychiatry
  • ISSN: 0007-1250
  • EISSN: 1472-1465
  • URL: /core/journals/the-british-journal-of-psychiatry
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 14
Total number of PDF views: 136 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 490 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 21st September 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR)

  • Julie Williams (a1), Mary Leamy (a1), Francesca Pesola (a1), Victoria Bird (a1), Clair Le Boutillier (a1) and Mike Slade (a1)...
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *