A UK validation of the Stages of Recovery Instrument

Gavin Weeks, Mike Slade and Mark Hayward
Additional contact information
Gavin Weeks: University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
Mike Slade: Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, UK
Mark Hayward: University of Surrey & Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, UK, m.hayward@surrey.ac.uk

International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 2011, vol. 57, issue 5, 446-454

Abstract: Objective: There is considerable interest in the concept of recovery from psychosis. Consumers describe recovery as a process as opposed to a clinical outcome. However, measures of recovery have an important role in the development of recovery-based mental health services. This study sought to investigate the validity and reliability of the Stages of Recovery Instrument (STORI) (Andresen et al ., 2006). This is an Australian instrument chosen as a promising measure of recovery developed from the perspectives of consumer accounts. Method: A questionnaire design was used to investigate the following aspects of validity: face validity and feasibility; concurrent validity; construct validity; and test-retest reliability. Fifty (50) people from the caseloads of three specialist mental health teams in a London borough completed the STORI, the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) (Corrigan et al ., 1999) and a feedback questionnaire. Twenty two (22) people completed the STORI a second time for the purposes of test-retest reliability exploration. Results: Participants’ responses to the feedback questionnaire were mainly positive. This was seen as evidence of face validity and feasibility. Correlations between the STORI and the RAS provided evidence of concurrent validity. Cluster analysis revealed that the STORI items formed three clusters rather than five. Strong correlations between the first and second STORI administrations provided initial evidence for the test-retest reliability. Conclusions: The STORI can be used to measure recovery concepts in the UK. However, it does not measure the five-stage model on which it was based. A three-stage model of recovery might best form the basis of future recovery research.

Keywords: recovery; psychosis; validity; reliability (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2011
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0020764010365414 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:57:y:2011:i:5:p:446-454

DOI: 10.1177/0020764010365414

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in International Journal of Social Psychiatry
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().