Instruments to assess mental health-related stigma among health professionals and students in health sciences: A systematic psychometric review.

Abstract

To evaluate the psychometric properties of the instruments to assess the mental health-related stigma among health professionals and students in health sciences. Evidence on the stigmatization by health professionals of people with mental health illness is increasingly compelling. Valid and reliable instruments are needed for the assessment of mental health-related stigma and effectiveness of anti-stigma interventions. Systematic psychometric review. MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL (via EBSCO), PsycINFO, Scopus, and Open Grey from their inception to August 2017. No limits were applied. We included studies on the development of a measurement instrument or on the evaluation of one or more of its measurement properties. The methodological quality of the included studies and quality of the measurement instruments identified were assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. We included 25 studies involving 15 measurement instruments. The "Atributtion Questionnaire" (five studies) and the "Opening Minds Scale for Health Care providers (OMS-HC)" (four studies) were the most investigated instruments. Internal consistency, content validity, structural validity, and hypothesis testing were the measurement properties most commonly evaluated. Measurement error and responsiveness were investigated in only two studies. Eight psychometric properties of OMS-HC were evaluated, three of which have a positive strong level of evidence. A substantial number of instruments have been developed to assess mental health-related stigma among health professionals. There is a lack of any assessment of certain measurement properties. The OMS-HC is the instrument that had the strongest evidence.