Purpose <p>This study developed and evaluated a new personal recovery scale—Global INSPIRE—in English and Japanese, and compared responses between Japan and the UK. Personal recovery—living a satisfying and meaningful life despite mental health challenges—has gained attention in mental health. The widely-used CHIME framework identifies five recovery processes: Connectedness, Hope, Identity, Meaning, and Empowerment. Full INSPIRE evaluates whether service users feel supported in each CHIME process. However, emerging cross-cultural evidence indicates differences in the priority placed on each CHIME domain. No tool exists to assess recovery priorities, hindering cross-cultural research.</p> Methods <p>The 20-item self-completed Global INSPIRE was adapted from the Full INSPIRE to assess recovery priorities of both service users and non-service users. Participants in the UK (<i>n</i> = 512) and Japan (<i>n</i> = 507) completed the Global INSPIRE at baseline and two-week follow-up. Psychometric properties were evaluated, including reliability, test-retest stability, and discriminant validity with two established recovery scales—CORE-10 and QPR-15. Cross-national differences in recovery priorities were also examined.</p> Results <p>Both versions showed excellent reliability (α = 0.91 UK; 0.97 Japan), test-retest stability (4/5 processes UK, 5/5 Japan), and acceptable model fit (CFI = 0.80 UK; 0.85 Japan). Measurement invariance supported configural (CFI = 0.89) and metric invariance (CFI = 0.89) but not scalar invariance (CFI = 0.83). Discriminant validity was supported by weak correlations with CORE-10 and QPR-15. UK participants prioritised Hope, Meaning, and Empowerment, while Japanese participants prioritised Identity.</p> Conclusion <p>Global INSPIRE is a reliable and culturally adaptable tool for assessing distinct recovery priorities. Future research should explore demographic differences and expand testing across diverse cultural contexts.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Development and evaluation of a mental health recovery priority measure for cross-cultural research: global INSPIRE

  • Yasuhiro Kotera,
  • Akemi Hara,
  • Christopher Newby,
  • Yuki Miyamoto,
  • Akihiko Ozaki,
  • Yumna Ali,
  • Pamela Clinton,
  • Simon Felix,
  • Catherine John,
  • Natthapon Inta,
  • Mike Slade

摘要

Purpose

This study developed and evaluated a new personal recovery scale—Global INSPIRE—in English and Japanese, and compared responses between Japan and the UK. Personal recovery—living a satisfying and meaningful life despite mental health challenges—has gained attention in mental health. The widely-used CHIME framework identifies five recovery processes: Connectedness, Hope, Identity, Meaning, and Empowerment. Full INSPIRE evaluates whether service users feel supported in each CHIME process. However, emerging cross-cultural evidence indicates differences in the priority placed on each CHIME domain. No tool exists to assess recovery priorities, hindering cross-cultural research.

Methods

The 20-item self-completed Global INSPIRE was adapted from the Full INSPIRE to assess recovery priorities of both service users and non-service users. Participants in the UK (n = 512) and Japan (n = 507) completed the Global INSPIRE at baseline and two-week follow-up. Psychometric properties were evaluated, including reliability, test-retest stability, and discriminant validity with two established recovery scales—CORE-10 and QPR-15. Cross-national differences in recovery priorities were also examined.

Results

Both versions showed excellent reliability (α = 0.91 UK; 0.97 Japan), test-retest stability (4/5 processes UK, 5/5 Japan), and acceptable model fit (CFI = 0.80 UK; 0.85 Japan). Measurement invariance supported configural (CFI = 0.89) and metric invariance (CFI = 0.89) but not scalar invariance (CFI = 0.83). Discriminant validity was supported by weak correlations with CORE-10 and QPR-15. UK participants prioritised Hope, Meaning, and Empowerment, while Japanese participants prioritised Identity.

Conclusion

Global INSPIRE is a reliable and culturally adaptable tool for assessing distinct recovery priorities. Future research should explore demographic differences and expand testing across diverse cultural contexts.