MétaCan
← all works

Development and Psychometric Properties of the Mental Health Knowledge Schedule

2010· article· en· 409 citations· W1930541572 on OpenAlex· 10.1177/070674371005500707

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian venueIt was published in a Canadian venue.

No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame — the usual design — would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread
0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Stigma has been conceptualized as comprised of 3 constructs: knowledge (ignorance), attitudes (prejudice), and behaviour (discrimination). We are not aware of a psychometrically tested instrument to assess knowledge about mental health problems among the general public. Our paper presents the results of the development stage and the psychometric properties of the Mental Health Knowledge Schedule (MAKS), an instrument to assess stigma-related mental health knowledge among the general public. METHODS: We describe the development of the MAKS in addition to 3 studies that were carried out to evaluate the psychometric properties of the MAKS. Adults aged 25 to 45 years in socioeconomic groups: B, C1, and C2 completed the instrument via face-to-face interview (n = 92) and online (n = 403). RESULTS: Internal reliability and test-retest reliability is moderate to substantial. Validity is supported by extensive review by experts (including service users and international experts in stigma research). CONCLUSION: The lack of a valid outcome measure to assess knowledge is a shortcoming of evaluations of stigma interventions and programs. The MAKS was found to be a brief and feasible instrument for assessing and tracking stigma-related mental health knowledge. This instrument should be used in conjunction with other attitude- and behaviour-related measures.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

The record

Venue
The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry
Topic
Mental Health Treatment and Access
Field
Psychology
Canadian institutions
Funders
Mental Health Commission
Keywords
PsychologyMental healthStigma (botany)Clinical psychologyPsychological interventionPsychometricsApplied psychologyReliability (semiconductor)Public healthPsychiatryMedicineNursing
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes