Original CAN reliability and validity study Phelan M, Slade M, Thornicroft G, Dunn G, Holloway F, Wykes T, Strathdee G, Loftus L, McCrone P & Hayward P (1995) The Camberwell Assessment of Need: the validity and reliability of an instrument to assess the needs of people with severe mental illness, British Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 589–95.

2020 ◽  
pp. 117-125
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
British Journal ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Validity Study ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Camberwell Assessment Of Need ◽  
Assessment Of Need

scholarly journals Factor structure in the Camberwell Assessment of Need

2004 ◽  
Vol 185 (6) ◽  
pp. 505-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Wennström ◽  
Dag Sörbom ◽  
Frits-Axel Wiesel
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Functional Disability ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis ◽  
Emotional Loneliness ◽  
Camberwell Assessment Of Need ◽  
Assessment Of Need

BackgroundIn order to define needs for care of people with severe mental illness, the Camberwell Assessment of Need (CAN) is focused on measuring personal and social functioning. However, previous studies of the CAN have given inconsistent results in terms of what variables are actually being measured.AimsTo investigate the factor structure of the CAN.MethodAssessments of 741 out-patients (mean age 45.5 years, 50% females) with severe mental illness (68% schizophrenia or other psychotic disorder) were used in an exploratory maximum likelihood factor analysis.ResultsSupport was found for a three-factor model, comprising 13 of the 22 variables in the CAN, with the factors corresponding to functional disability (7 variables), social loneliness (3 variables) and emotional loneliness (3 variables). The remaining variables did not load on any factor.ConclusionsExploratory factor analysis revealed three homogeneous dimensions in the CAN that may represent functional disability and two aspects of social health.

The Camberwell Assessment of Need: The Validity and Reliability of an Instrument to Assess the Needs of People with Severe Mental Illness

1995 ◽  
Vol 167 (5) ◽  
pp. 589-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Phelan ◽  
Mike Slade ◽  
Graham Thornicroft ◽  
Graham Dunn ◽  
Frank Holloway ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Complete Agreement ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
New Instrument ◽  
Camberwell Assessment Of Need ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Assessment Of Need

BackgroundPeople with severe mental illness often have a complex mixture of clinical and social needs. The Camberwell Assessment of Need (CAN) is a new instrument which has been designed to provide a comprehensive assessment of these needs. There are two versions of the instrument: the clinical version has been designed to be used by staff to plan patients' care; whereas the research version is primarily a mental health service evaluation tool. The CAN has been designed to assist local authorities to fulfil their statutory obligations under the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990 to assess needs for community services.MethodA draft version of the instrument was designed by the authors. Modifications were made following comments from mental health experts and a patient survey. Patients (n = 49) and staff (n = 60) were then interviewed, using the amended version, to assess the inter-rater and test-retest reliability of the instrument.ResultsThe mean number of needs identified per patient ranged from 7.55 to 8.64. Correlations of the inter-rater and test-retest reliability of the total number of needs identified by staff were 0.99 and 0.78 respectively. The percentage of complete agreement on individual items ranged from 100–81.6% (inter-rater) and 100–58.1% (test-retest).ConclusionsThe study suggests that the CAN is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the needs of people with severe mental illness. It is easily learnt by staff from a range of professional backgrounds, and a complete assessment took, on average, around 25 minutes.

Comparing needs assessed by staff and by service users: paternalism or partnership in mental health?

2002 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 186-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham Thornicroft ◽  
Mike Slade
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Camberwell Assessment Of Need ◽  
Assessment Of Need

This paper examines two questions. Do staff and service users agree when rating the needs of those with severe mental illness? If not, what is the meaning of these differences? To put these questions in context, we shall define needs, examine one particular way in which needs can be measured in a standardised way, using the Camberwell Assessment of Need, and shall discuss three somewhat similar studies which have compared user and staff rated needs.

Validity and Reliability of Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness (Cantonese)

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Kim-Wan Young ◽  
Petrus Y. N. Ng ◽  
Jia-Yan Pan ◽  
Daphne Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Internalized Stigma ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Chinese Consumers ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
People With Mental Illness ◽  
Five Factors ◽  
Stigma Of Mental Illness

Purpose: This study aims to translate and test the reliability and validity of the Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness-Cantonese (ISMI-C). Methods: The original English version of ISMI is translated into the ISMI-C by going through forward and backward translation procedure. A cross-sectional research design is adopted that involved 295 participants randomly drawn from a population of Chinese consumers participated in different kinds of community-based mental health services. Results: Results show that the Cronbach’s α coefficient of the ISMI-C is .93. With regard to validity test, the ISMI-C shows significant and negative correlation with measures on self-esteem and quality of life. Also, an explorative factor analysis yields five factors that are consistent with previous research results. Discussion: This study shows that the ISMI-C is a reliable and valid measure. ISMI-C can facilitate the development of interventions in reducing self-stigma for people with mental illness across Chinese societies.

scholarly journals Making a difference: ethnic inequality and severe mental illness

2018 ◽  
Vol 213 (4) ◽  
pp. 574-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamaldeep Bhui ◽  
Kristoffer Halvorsrud ◽  
James Nazroo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
British Journal ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Ethnic Inequality ◽  
Quality Research ◽  
Ethnic Inequalities ◽  
Making A Difference

SummaryIn this paper, we explore ethnic inequalities in severe mental illness and care experiences. We consider the barriers to progressive and cohesive action and propose ways of overcoming these. Clinical and policy leadership must bring together hidden patient voices, divergent professional narratives and quality research.Declaration of interestK.B. is Editor of the British Journal of Psychiatry, but has not played any role in the decision-making for this paper. K.B. leads and J.N. is a partner and K.H. a researcher in the Synergi Collaborative Centre.

Measuring the needs of mental health patients in Greece: Reliability and validity of the Greek version of the Camberwell Assessment of Need

2013 ◽  
Vol 60 (7) ◽  
pp. 662-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pentagiotissa Stefanatou ◽  
Eleni Giannouli ◽  
George Konstantakopoulos ◽  
Silia Vitoratou ◽  
Venetsanos Mavreas
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Greek Version ◽  
Mental Health Patients ◽  
Camberwell Assessment Of Need ◽  
Assessment Of Need
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document