Mental health literacy: a systematic review of the measurement instruments
Barre latérale de l'article
Contenu principal de l'article
Résumé
Background: Mental health literacy has become increasingly important as an empowerment tool in the field of mental health. Any intervention should always be preceded by a clear diagnosis of the situation. Objectives: To identify mental health literacy measurement instruments among adults living in a given community. Methods: An integrativereview of theliterature wasconducted using the PICOD method bysearching thefollowing scientific databases: PubMed, SciELO, LILACS, MEDLINE, EBSCO, Cochrane Library and EMBASE. The JBI critical appraisal checklist for methodological quality was used and the PRISMA guidelines were taken into account to critically assess the quality of the studies included in this work. Three articles met the inclusion criteria and were therefore included in the study. Results: Three instruments for assessing mental health literacy were identified: the MHLS, the MHKQ and the MAKS. The assessment of the methodological and psychometric quality of each of these instruments demonstrated that one of the studies showed a very good level of reliability, another study showed an acceptable level of reliability, whereas the last one showed a poor level of reliability. Conclusion: These results show that the MHLS is the best validated assessment tool for health care professionals. Given the limited number of primary studies identified, the construction of an instrument to assess the level of positive mental health literacy in the community is crucial.
Téléchargements
Details de l'article
Ce travail est disponible sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.
Aquellos autores/as que tengan publicaciones con esta revista, aceptan los términos siguientes:
- Los autores/as conservarán sus derechos de autor y garantizarán a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de su obra, el cuál estará simultáneamente sujeto a la Licencia de reconocimiento de Creative Commons que permite a terceros copiar y redistribuir el material en cualquier medio o formato bajo los siguientes términos: —se debe dar crédito de manera adecuada, brindar un enlace a la licencia, e indicar si se han realizado cambios. Puede hacerlo en cualquier forma razonable, pero no de forma tal que sugiera que usted o su uso tienen el apoyo de la licenciante (Atribución); — no se puede hacer uso del material con propósitos comerciales (No Comercial); — si se remezcla, transforma o crea a partir del material, no podrá distribuirse el material modificado (Sin Derivadas).
- Los autores/as podrán adoptar otros acuerdos de licencia no exclusiva de distribución de la versión de la obra publicada (p. ej.: depositarla en un archivo telemático institucional o publicarla en un volumen monográfico) siempre que se indique la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y recomienda a los autores/as difundir su obra a través de Internet (p. ej.: en archivos telemáticos institucionales o en su página web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, lo cual puede producir intercambios interesantes y aumentar las citas de la obra publicada. (Véase El efecto del acceso abierto).
Este obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional.
Références
Berkman, N. D., Sheridan, S. L., Donahue, K. E., Halpern, D. J., Viera, A., Crotty, K., Holland, A., Brasure, M., Lohr, K. N., Harden, E., Tant, E., Wallace, I., Viswanathan, M. (2011). Health Literacy Interventions and Outcomes: An Updated Systematic Review. Evidence Report/Technology Assesment No. 199. (Prepared by RTI International–University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center under contract No. 290-2007-10056-I. AHRQ Publication Number 11-E006. Rockville, MD. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Carvalho, L. de F., Marin Rueda, F. J. (2016). Tipos e estratégias de avaliação. In C. Gorestein, Y. P. Wang, & I. Hungerbühler (orgs.), Instrumentos de avaliação em saúde mental (Cap. 1.3, pp. 17-22). Porto Alegre: Artmed.
Gaino, L. V., Souza, J., Cirineu, C. Tiago, & Tulimosky, T. D. (2018). O conceito de saúde mental para profissionais de saúde: um estudo transversal e qualitativo*. SMAD. Revista eletrônica saúde mental álcool e drogas, 14(2), 108-116. https://dx.doi.org/10.11606/issn.1806-6976.smad.2018.149449
Hansson, L., Stjernswärd, S & Svensson, B. (2016). Changes in attitudes, intended behaviour, and mental health literacy in the Swedish population 2009-2014: na evaluation of a national antistigma programme. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavic, 134(446), pp. 71-79. doi: 10.1111/acps.12609.
Higgins, J. P. T., Green, S. (Eds.) (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: verison 5.1.0. London: The Cochrane Collaboration. Retrieved from http://www.cochrane.handbook.org
Jorm, A. F., Korten, A. E., Jacomb, P. A., Christensen, H., Rodgers, B. & Pollitt, P. (1997). Mental health literacy: a survey of the public’s ability to recognise mental disorders and their beliefs about the effectiveness of treatment. Medical Journal of Australia, 166(4), pp. 182-186.
Loureiro, L. M. J., Jorm, A. F., Rodrigues, M. A., Santos, J. C. P., Oliveira, R. A., Abrantes, A. R. D., …Cardoso, D. F. B. (2014). Literacia em saúde mental – capacitar as pessoas e as comunidades para agir. Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra, Unidade de Investigação em Ciências da Saúde.
Marques, S., & Lemos, S. (2017). Instrumentos de avaliação do letramento em saúde: revisão de literatura. Audiology - Communication Research, 22, e1757. Epub 24 de julho de 2017.https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2317-6431-2016-1757
Mokkink, L. B., de Vet, H., Prinsen, C., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., & Terwee, C. B. (2018). COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Quality of life research: an international journal of quality-of-life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 27(5), 1171–1179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4
National Assessment of Adult Literacy. (2003). Definition of literacy. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/NAAl/fr_definition.asp
O’Connor, M. & Casey, L. (2015). The Mental Health Literacy Scale (MHLS): A new scale-based measure of mental health literacy. Psychiatry Research. 229(1-2), pp. 511-516. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2015.05.064.
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372: n71. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71
Portugal, Ministério da Saúde, Direção Geral da Saúde. (2016). Perguntas e Respostas. Retrieved from https://www.dgs.pt/paginas-de-sistema/saude-de-a-a-z/programa-nacional-para-a-saude-mental/perguntas-e-respostas.aspx
Portugal, Ministério da Saúde, Direção Geral da Saúde. (2017b). Programa Nacional para a Saúde Mental. Lisboa: DGS.
Public Health England. (2015). Local action on health inequalities - Improving health literacy to reduce health inequalities. Retrieved from http://www.healthliteracyplace.org.uk/media/1239/hl-and-hi-ucl.pdf
Quartilho, J. M. (2010). Saúde Mental. Coimbra: Estado da Arte.
Stephenson, M., Riitano, D., Wilson, S., Leonardi-Bee, J., Mabire, C., Cooper, K., Monteiro da Cruz, D., MorenoCasbas, M. T., Lapkin, S. (2020). Chapter 12: Systematic reviews of measurement properties. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Editors). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI, 2020. Available from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global. https://doi.org/110.46658/JBIMES-20-13
The Joanna Briggs Institute. (2017). Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies. Retrieved from http://joannabriggs.org/assets/docs/critical-appraisal-tools/JBI_Critical_Appraisal-Checklist_for_Analytical_Cross_Sectional_Studies2017.pdf
Varandas, T. & Carneiro, A. V. (2006). Tipos de estudos clínicos. IV. Revisões sistemáticas. Revista Portuguesa de Cardiologia, 25(2), pp. 233-246.
Wang, J., He, Y., Jiang, Q., Cai, J., Wang, W., Zeng, Q., Miao, J., … Zhang, M. (2013). Mental health literacy among residentes in Shanghai. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry. 25(4), pp. 224-235. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1002-0829.2013.04.004.
Wei, Y., McGrath, P., Hayden, J. & Kutcher, S. (2016). Measurement properties of tools measuring mental health knowledge: a systemic review. BMC Psychiatry 16(297), pp. 1-16. doi: 10.1186/s12888-016-1012-5.
World Health Organization. (2014). In Mental Health: a state of well-being. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/features/factfiles/mental_health/en/
Yu, Y., Liu, Z., Hu, M., Liu, X., Liu, H., Yang, J., … Xiao, S. (2015). Assessment of mental health literacy using a multifaceted measure among a Chinese rural population. BMJ Open, 5. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009054.