Cited by 60Mental Health and Patient InvolvementPsychometric Methodologies and TestingSchizophrenia research and treatment

Citizenship and recovery: two intertwined concepts for civic-recovery

Open access
Pelletier, Jean-François, Corbière, Marc, Lecomte, Tania, Briand, Catherine, Corrigan, Patrick, Davidson, Larry, Rowe, Michael·2015·BMC Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Validation of the psychometric properties of a new measure of citizenship was required for a research project in the province of Quebec, Canada. This study was meant to study the interplay between recovery- and citizenship-oriented supportive employment. As recovery and citizenship were expected to be two related concepts, convergent validity between the Citizenship Measure (CM) and the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) was tested. METHODS: Study objectives were to: 1) conduct exploratory factor analyses on the CM and confirmatory factor analysis on the RAS tools (construct validity), 2) calculate Cronbach's alphas for each dimension emerging from objective 1 (reliability), and 3) calculate correlations between all dimensions from both tools (convergent validity). Data were collected from 174 individuals with serious mental illness, working in social firms. Serious mental illnesses include major depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, panic disorder, post traumatic stress disorder and borderline personality disorder. RESULTS: Five factors emerged from the exploratory factor analysis of the CM, with good reliability. Confirmatory factor analyses showed that the short and the long versions of the RAS present satisfactory results. Finally, the correlation matrix indicated that all dimensions from both tools are significantly correlated, thus confirming their convergent validity. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the validity and reliability of two tools, CM and RAS. These tools can be used in combination to assess citizenship and recovery, both of which may be combined in the new concept of civic-recovery.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12888-015-0420-2

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [12]Ralph RO Kidder K Phillips D Can We Measure Recovery? A Compendium of Recovery and Recovery-related Instruments 2000 Cambridge, MA Human Services Research Institute

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pelletier, J.-F., Corbière, M., Lecomte, T., Briand, C., Corrigan, P., Davidson, L., & Rowe, M.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • Université de Sherbrooke (CA)
  • Institut universitaire en santé mentale de Montréal (CA)
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • Illinois Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Pelletier, Jean-François
Venue
BMC Psychiatry
Published
2015-03-04
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
37-37
ISSN
1471-244X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2172080393
Cited by
60
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4
FWCI
11.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
citizenship, recovery, Recovery Assessment Scale, psychometric validation, severe mental illness, supported employment, social firms, construct validity, reliability statistics, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Borderline Personality Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Quebec, Surveys and Questionnaires, Schizophrenia, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Reproducibility of Results, Panic Disorder, Employment, Supported, Treatment Outcome, Patient Outcome Assessment

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