Cited by 8Psychiatric care and mental health servicesHomelessness and Social IssuesHealth Education and Validation

Measuring opportunities for engaging in meaningful home-based activities in housing services for people with psychiatric disabilities: Development of the perceived meaning of activity in housing (PMA-H)

Eklund, Mona, Brunt, David·2019·Evaluation & the Health Professions

Abstract

There is a scarcity of instruments for assessing opportunities for residents with psychiatric disabilities to engage in meaningful home-based activities. We thus developed the Perceived Meaning of Activity in Housing (PMA-H), containing four subscales (activity opportunities, social interaction, developing as a person, and organization and planning). The aim of the study was to investigate the content validity, utility, internal consistency and concurrent and criterion validity of the PMA-H, as well as possible floor and ceiling effects. One hundred and fifty-five residents in supported housing (SH) and 111 in ordinary housing with support (OHS) completed the PMA-H. The SH group also competed the Community-Oriented Programs Environment Scale (COPES). A majority of the participants found the content of the PMA-H relevant, easy to complete, and the time for completion as reasonable. Internal consistency varied between 0.85 and 0.92 for the subscales. Logical associations with COPES indicated construct validity. The subscales social interaction and developing as a person could discriminate between the SH and OHS groups, whereas activity opportunities could not. No floor or ceiling effects were found. This study indicated adequate initial psychometric properties of the PMA-H. It can thus be used in housing settings to assess the residents' perceived opportunities for meaningful activity in the housing context.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0163278717727333

Cites

28 of 28 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?

  • Time use provides insight into how people structure their time, their priorities, the social and spatial contexts of their lives and key barriers they face.

    “It provides insight into how people structure their time, their priorities, the social and spatial contexts of their lives and key barriers they face (21).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eklund, M., & Brunt, D.
Affiliations
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Linnaeus University (SE)
Corresponding author
Eklund, Mona
Venue
Evaluation & the Health Professions
Published
2017-08-23
Volume
42
Issue
2
Pages
131-147
ISSN
  • 0163-2787 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3918
OpenAlex
W2748867175
Cited by
8
References
28
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Evaluation & the Health Professions (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd (2014-4488)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Homelessness and Social Issues
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
psychiatric disability, supported housing, psychometric validation, content validity, construct validity, social interaction, human development, floor and ceiling effects
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Mental Disorders, Female, Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sweden, Group Homes

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