Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR)
Background: Supporting recovery is the aim of national mental health policy in many countries, including England. There is a need for standardised measures of recovery, to assess policy implementation and inform clinical practice. Only one measure of recovery has been developed in England: the Quest...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Royal College of Psychiatrists
2015
|
| Online Access: | https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/31028/ |
| _version_ | 1848794112213385216 |
|---|---|
| author | Williams, Julie Leamy, Mary Pesola, Francesca Bird, Victoria Le Boutillier, Clair Slade, Mike |
| author_facet | Williams, Julie Leamy, Mary Pesola, Francesca Bird, Victoria Le Boutillier, Clair Slade, Mike |
| author_sort | Williams, Julie |
| building | Nottingham Research Data Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Background: Supporting recovery is the aim of national mental health policy in many countries, including England. There is a need for standardised measures of recovery, to assess policy implementation and inform clinical practice. 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-item and 22-item versions of QPR.
Method: Two samples were used: Dataset 1 (n=88) involved assessment of QPR at baseline, two weeks and three months. Dataset 2 (n=399; ISRCTN02507940) involved assessment of QPR at baseline and one 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 comprising two sub-scales, the Interpersonal sub-scale was found to under-perform and the Intrapersonal sub-scale overlaps substantially with the 15 item version. Conclusions: Both the 15-item and the Intrapersonal sub-scale 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.
Declaration of interest: None. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T19:11:01Z |
| format | Article |
| id | nottingham-31028 |
| institution | University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T19:11:01Z |
| publishDate | 2015 |
| publisher | Royal College of Psychiatrists |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | nottingham-310282020-05-04T17:21:08Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/31028/ Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) Williams, Julie Leamy, Mary Pesola, Francesca Bird, Victoria Le Boutillier, Clair Slade, Mike Background: Supporting recovery is the aim of national mental health policy in many countries, including England. There is a need for standardised measures of recovery, to assess policy implementation and inform clinical practice. 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-item and 22-item versions of QPR. Method: Two samples were used: Dataset 1 (n=88) involved assessment of QPR at baseline, two weeks and three months. Dataset 2 (n=399; ISRCTN02507940) involved assessment of QPR at baseline and one 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 comprising two sub-scales, the Interpersonal sub-scale was found to under-perform and the Intrapersonal sub-scale overlaps substantially with the 15 item version. Conclusions: Both the 15-item and the Intrapersonal sub-scale 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. Declaration of interest: None. Royal College of Psychiatrists 2015-12-01 Article PeerReviewed Williams, Julie, Leamy, Mary, Pesola, Francesca, Bird, Victoria, Le Boutillier, Clair and Slade, Mike (2015) Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR). British Journal of Psychiatry, 207 (6). pp. 551-555. ISSN 1472-1465 http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/207/6/551 doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.114.161695 doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.114.161695 |
| spellingShingle | Williams, Julie Leamy, Mary Pesola, Francesca Bird, Victoria Le Boutillier, Clair Slade, Mike Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) |
| title | Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) |
| title_full | Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) |
| title_fullStr | Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) |
| title_full_unstemmed | Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) |
| title_short | Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) |
| title_sort | psychometric evaluation of the questionnaire about the process of recovery (qpr) |
| url | https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/31028/ https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/31028/ https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/31028/ |