Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 4/2018

01-10-2018

Factor Structure and Sensitivity to Change of the Recovery Assessment Scale

Authors: Salene M. W. Jones, Ph.D, Evette J. Ludman, Ph.D

Published in: The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research | Issue 4/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

The focus on recovery, not just symptom reduction, in mental health care brings a need for psychometrically sound measures of recovery. This study examined the factor structure and sensitivity to change of a common measure of mental health recovery, the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS). We conducted a secondary data analysis from a randomized clinical trial of self-management for depression (n = 302). We tested both bifactor and the previously found five-factor model. Sensitivity to change was examined three ways: (1) between the intervention and control group; (2) across time in the intervention group; and (3) in those whose depression remitted. The previous five-factor model was supported. One subscale, no domination by symptoms, was particularly sensitive to change and showed sensitivity to change whereas the subscale reliance on others did not show change in any of the comparisons. Results suggest that the subscales of the RAS should be examined separately in future studies of recovery.
Literature
1.
go back to reference President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental Health Care in America. In: Services HaH, ed2003. President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental Health Care in America. In: Services HaH, ed2003.
2.
go back to reference Schrank B, Slade M. Recovery in psychiatry. Psychiatric Bulletin. 2007;31:321–325.CrossRef Schrank B, Slade M. Recovery in psychiatry. Psychiatric Bulletin. 2007;31:321–325.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Giffort D, Schmook A, Woody C, et al. Construction of a scale to measure consumer recovery. 1995, Springfield, IL. Giffort D, Schmook A, Woody C, et al. Construction of a scale to measure consumer recovery. 1995, Springfield, IL.
4.
go back to reference Corrigan PW, Salzer M, Ralph RO, et al. Examining the factor structure of the recovery assessment scale. Schizophrenia Bulletin. 2004;30(4):1035–1041.CrossRef Corrigan PW, Salzer M, Ralph RO, et al. Examining the factor structure of the recovery assessment scale. Schizophrenia Bulletin. 2004;30(4):1035–1041.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Holzinger KJ, Swineford F. The bifactor method. Psychometrika. 1937;2:41–54.CrossRef Holzinger KJ, Swineford F. The bifactor method. Psychometrika. 1937;2:41–54.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Corrigan PW, Giffort D, Rashid F, et al. Recovery as a psychological construct. Community Mental Health Journal. 1999;35(3):231–239.CrossRef Corrigan PW, Giffort D, Rashid F, et al. Recovery as a psychological construct. Community Mental Health Journal. 1999;35(3):231–239.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference McNaught M, Caputi P, Oades LG, et al. Testing the validity of the Recovery Assessment Scale using an Australian sample. Australian and New Zealand Journal Psychiatry. 2007;41(5):450–457.CrossRef McNaught M, Caputi P, Oades LG, et al. Testing the validity of the Recovery Assessment Scale using an Australian sample. Australian and New Zealand Journal Psychiatry. 2007;41(5):450–457.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Oxford University Press; 2008. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Oxford University Press; 2008.
9.
go back to reference Ludman EJ, Simon GE, Grothaus LC, et al. Organized Self-Management Support Services for Chronic Depressive Symptoms: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Psychiatric Services. 2015:appips201400295. Ludman EJ, Simon GE, Grothaus LC, et al. Organized Self-Management Support Services for Chronic Depressive Symptoms: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Psychiatric Services. 2015:appips201400295.
10.
go back to reference First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, et al. Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV Axis I disorders, research version, non-patient edition (SCID-I/NP). New York: Biometrics Research, New York State Psychiatric Institute; 2002. First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, et al. Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV Axis I disorders, research version, non-patient edition (SCID-I/NP). New York: Biometrics Research, New York State Psychiatric Institute; 2002.
11.
go back to reference American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR. 4th ed., text revision ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR. 4th ed., text revision ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.
12.
go back to reference Browne M, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. London, England: Sage; 1993. Browne M, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. London, England: Sage; 1993.
13.
go back to reference Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRef Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2 ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 1988. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2 ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 1988.
15.
go back to reference Kessler RC, Chiu WT, Demler O, et al. Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Archives of General Psychiatry. 2005;62(6):617–627.CrossRef Kessler RC, Chiu WT, Demler O, et al. Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Archives of General Psychiatry. 2005;62(6):617–627.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Reise SP, Morizot J, Hays RD. The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Quality of Life Research. 2007;16 Suppl 1:19–31.CrossRef Reise SP, Morizot J, Hays RD. The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Quality of Life Research. 2007;16 Suppl 1:19–31.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Drapalski AL, Medoff D, Unick GJ, et al. Assessing recovery of people with serious mental illness: development of a new scale. Psychiatric Services. 2012;63(1):48–53.CrossRef Drapalski AL, Medoff D, Unick GJ, et al. Assessing recovery of people with serious mental illness: development of a new scale. Psychiatric Services. 2012;63(1):48–53.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Factor Structure and Sensitivity to Change of the Recovery Assessment Scale
Authors
Salene M. W. Jones, Ph.D
Evette J. Ludman, Ph.D
Publication date
01-10-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research / Issue 4/2018
Print ISSN: 1094-3412
Electronic ISSN: 2168-6793
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-017-9563-x

Other articles of this Issue 4/2018

The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 4/2018 Go to the issue