Search

There is increasing interest in measuring wellbeing and mental health in a range of settings and services outside conventional mental health care settings. However, ensuring that measurement does not intrude on the primary service activity whilst promoting inclusion through minimizing literacy demands, requires ultra-brief and easy to use tools. To develop and test a brief emoji-based tool to assess mental health, wellbeing, resilience and community connection. In study 1, 672 adults completed an online questionnaire study comprising a new emoji measure and established questionnaires assessing mental health, resilience, community connection and wellbeing. In study 2, 415 participants completed a paper-and-pencil version of the emoji measure, mental health and community connection, with 212 individuals providing data at a second time point. Multidimensional scaling revealed a meaningful structure to the emoji measure with validity demonstrated through relationships to existing scales. Stability over time and sensitivity to change were also demonstrated. The emoji-based measure presented here provides an ultra-brief measure of mood and current experience, with minimal literacy demands on participants. Further research is now needed to test the properties and utility of the scale with other participant groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is important to identify valid and acceptable outcome measures so that interventions evaluating common mental health problems can be assessed appropriately. Some advocate the use of generic preference-based measures claimed to be applicable for all health interventions, but others argue that they are insensitive for common mental health problems. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure (CORE-OM), to be used in cost-effectiveness studies in people with common mental health problems. The CORE-OM measure was tested for completeness, acceptability and responsiveness in a pilot study. Analyses for missing data, distribution of scores, and standardised response means (SRMs) were calculated. Missing data did not exceed 5% for any of the CORE-6D items both at baseline and follow-up. The overall comprehension rate was high, and only 19 participants (14%) requested clarifications to complete the questionnaire. As expected in a feasibility study, there was a small and non-significant SRM. CORE-OM is a valid and acceptable instrument to evaluate quality of life for people with common mental health problems. More research is needed with larger sample sizes to compare CORE-6D with other condition specific quality of life instruments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]