Cited by 33Mental Health and Patient InvolvementPsychiatric care and mental health servicesSchizophrenia research and treatment

Relationship between satisfaction with mental health services, personal recovery and quality of life among service users with psychosis: a cross-sectional study

Open access
Skar-Fröding, Regina, Clausen, Hanne Kristin, Šaltytė Benth, Jūratė, Ruud, Torleif, Slade, Mike, Sverdvik Heiervang, Kristin·2021·BMC Health Services Research

Abstract

Background: Mental health policy internationally emphasizes patient centredness and personal recovery. This study investigated the relationship between satisfaction with mental health services among service users with psychosis in Norway, and personal recovery, perceived support for personal recovery, and quality of life. Methods: Cross-sectional data were collected from 292 service users diagnosed with psychosis from 39 clinical sites across Norway. Satisfaction with services was assessed using the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8. A linear mixed model was estimated to explore the relationship between satisfaction with services and preselected covariates, and to control for confounding factors. Results: A large majority of participants (89%) reported moderate-to-high levels of satisfaction. Satisfaction with services was positively associated with perceived support for personal recovery, but not with personal recovery or quality of life. In addition, service users under a Community Treatment Order (CTO) were significantly less satisfied than those who were not. Conclusions: Satisfaction levels among service users were higher compared with similar, international studies. Those who feel supported in their personal recovery were more satisfied with the care they receive, which support the need for implementation of recovery-oriented practices for service users with psychosis. However, satisfaction with services was not related to service user-rated quality of life or level of personal recovery; thus, more follow-up studies are needed. The lower satisfaction of service users placed under CTOs shows the importance of targeted interventions to improve satisfaction with services among this group. Trial registration: NCT03271242 , date of registration: 5 sept. 2017.

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/s12913-021-06409-0

Cites

36 of 36 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?

  • QPR-15 has high internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and convergent validity.

    “Its psychometric properties, specifically its internal consistency, test re-test reliability, and convergent validity, were found to be high [60, 61].”

    From Measuring the Effect of the Early assessment Team (MEET) for patients referred to outpatient mental health care: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (2024) · cites this paper as [61]

    The Methods > Measures section describes QPR as a 15-item measure and reports high internal consistency in this sample (Cronbach’s alpha 0.91). It does not report test–retest reliability or convergent validity; its general statement that QPR has adequate psychometric properties does not establish that those two properties are high. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. [25]Attkisson CC, Greenfield TK. The client satisfaction questionnaire (CSQ) scales and the service satisfaction scale-30 (SSS-30). Outcomes Assess Clin Pract. 1996;120(7):402–20.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Skar-Fröding, R., Clausen, H. K., Šaltytė Benth, J., Ruud, T., Slade, M., & Sverdvik Heiervang, K.
Affiliations
  • Akershus University Hospital (NO)
  • Innlandet Hospital Trust (NO)
  • University of Oslo (NO)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Skar-Fröding, Regina
Venue
BMC Health Services Research
Published
2021-05-08
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
439-439
ISSN
1472-6963 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3125937633
Cited by
33
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2
FWCI
4.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Health Services Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Duo Research Archive (University of Oslo) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Helse Sør-Øst RHF (2015106)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
personal recovery, quality of life, psychosis, service users, patient-centered care, recovery-oriented care, community treatment orders
MeSH terms
Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Mental Health Services, Norway, Personal Health Services, Personal Satisfaction, Psychotic Disorders, Quality of Life, Patient Satisfaction

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