Cited by 37Mental Health and Patient InvolvementPsychometric Methodologies and TestingCancer survivorship and care

Measuring personal recovery – psychometric properties of the Swedish Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR-Swe)

Argentzell, Elisabeth, Hultqvist, Jenny, Neil, Sandra, Eklund, Mona·2017·Nordic Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Personal recovery, defined as an individual process towards meaning, is an important target within mental health services. Measuring recovery hence requires reliable and valid measures. The Process of Recovery Questionnaire (QPR) was developed for that purpose. AIMS: The aim was to develop a Swedish version of the QPR (QPR-Swe) and explore its psychometric properties in terms of factor structure, internal consistency, construct validity and sensitivity to change. METHODS: A total of 226 participants entered the study. The factor structure was investigated by Principal Component Analysis and Scree plot. Construct validity was addressed in terms of convergent validity against indicators of self-mastery, self-esteem, quality of life and self-rated health. RESULTS: A one-factor solution of QPR-Swe received better support than a two-factor solution. Good internal consistency was indicated, α = 0.92, and construct validity was satisfactory. The QPR-Swe showed preliminary sensitivity to change. CONCLUSIONS: The QPR-Swe showed promising initial psychometric properties in terms of internal consistency, convergent validity and sensitivity to change. The QPR-Swe is recommended for use in research and clinical contexts to assess personal recovery among people with mental illness.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08039488.2017.1346144

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Argentzell, E., Hultqvist, J., Neil, S., & Eklund, M.
Affiliations
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Department of Clinical Psychology, Cromwell House Community Mental Health Team, Greater Manchester West NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
Corresponding author
Eklund, Mona
Venue
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2017-07-11
Volume
71
Issue
7
Pages
529-535
ISSN
  • 0029-1455 (ISSN-L)
  • 0803-9488
  • 1502-4725
OpenAlex
W2734495128
Cited by
37
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2
FWCI
5.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nordic Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Vetenskapsrådet (K2014-99X-20067-09-4)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
personal recovery, Swedish adaptation, psychometric properties, factor structure, construct validity, convergent validity, sensitivity to change, mental illness, self-control, self-esteem, quality of life, self-rated health
MeSH terms
Mental Health Recovery, Adult, Mental Disorders, Female, Health Status, Humans, Life Style, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Therapy, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Concept, Sweden, Reproducibility of Results, Self Efficacy, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review