Stages of Recovery Instrument (STORI)

Overview

Purpose

Measure recovery from serious mental illness

Respondent

Person with a Disability

Administration Method

Interview

Administration Mode

In-person

0

Population

Mental Health Challenges

Instrument Citation(s)

Psychometric Citations

• Andresen, R., Caputi, P., & Oades, L.G. (2006). Stage of recovery instrument: Development of a measure
  of recovery from serious mental illness. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 40,
  972-980.

  Type of Publication

  Peer review

  Instrument Language

  english

  Sample: Age (Mean and Range)

  Mean=44.13 years

  Sample: Age Group

  18-64 Years

  Sample: Countries/State

  USA

  Sample: Disability Type

  Schizophrenia

  Sample: Gender (%male)

  47.8

  Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)

  Not Reported

  Sample: Sampling Strategy

  Convenience Sample

  Sample: Size

  94

  Validity: Criterion Validity (Concurrent and Predictive)

  significant correlation with Recovery Assessment Scale (r=.52) & with PWB r=.62, suggesting that the STORI overall scores (stages) are valid measures

  Study design

  Cross-Sectional

• Lemos-Giraldez, S., Garcia-Alvarez, L., Paino, M., Fonseca-Pedrero, E., Vallina-Fernandez, O., Vallejo-
  Seco, G., Fernandez-Iglesias, P., Ordonez-Camblor, N., Solares-Vazquez, Mas-Exposito, L.,
  Barajas, A., & Andresen, R. (2015). Measuring stages of recovery from psychosis. Comprehensive
  Psychiatry, 56, 51-58.

  Type of Publication

  Peer review

  Instrument Language

  Spanish

  Sample: Age (Mean and Range)

  Mean=34.74 years

  Sample: Age Group

  Under 18 Years, 18-64 Years

  Sample: Countries/State

  Spain

  Sample: Disability Type

  Mental Health Challenges

  Sample: Gender (%male)

  70.5

  Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)

  Not Reported

  Sample: Sampling Strategy

  Convenience Sample

  Sample: Size

  95

  Reliability: Internal Consistency

  Cronbach's Alpha (α ranging from .83 (Stage 1-3-4) to .87 (stage 5); Cronbach's Alpha (stage 2) (α=.86)

  Validity: Criterion Validity (Concurrent and Predictive)

  significant correlation with Recovery Style Questionnaire stage 2 r=.31-- stage 3 r=.29 -- stage 4 r=.26-- stage 5 r=.33 (No significant correlation with stage 1), suggesting that the STORI overall scores (stages) are valid measures

  Study design

  Cross-Sectional

• Andresen, R., Caputi, P., & Oades, L. (2013). Development of a short measure of psychological recovery in serious mental illness: the STORI-30. Australasian Psychiatry, 21(3), 267-270.

  Type of Publication

  Peer review

  Instrument Language

  English

  Sample: Age (Mean and Range)

  43.56 years (SD = 12.23)

  Sample: Age Group

  18-64 Years

  Sample: Countries/State

  United Kingdom

  Sample: Disability Type

  Mental Health Challenges

  Sample: Gender (%male)

  109 male, 123 female

  Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)

  Not Reported

  Sample: Sampling Strategy

  Not Reported

  Sample: Size

  232

  Reliability: Internal Consistency

  Cronbach’s α=.77 (stage 2); Cronbach’s α=.85 (stage 4)

  Study design

  Cross-Sectional

• Andresen, R., Caputi, P., & Oades, L. (2006). Stages of recovery instrument: development of a measure of recovery from serious mental illness. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 40(11-12), 972-980.

  Type of Publication

  Peer review

  Instrument Language

  English

  Sample: Age (Mean and Range)

  from 19 to 76 years (M = 44.13, SD = 12.59)

  Sample: Age Group

  18-64 Years, 65+ Years

  Sample: Countries/State

  Not Reported

  Sample: Disability Type

  Mental Health Challenges

  Sample: Gender (%male)

  45 men and 49 women

  Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)

  Not Reported

  Sample: Sampling Strategy

  Not Reported

  Sample: Size

  94

  Reliability: Internal Consistency

  from α = 0.88 [Stage 4] to α = 0.94 [Stage 3]

  Validity: Criterion Validity (Concurrent and Predictive)

  Pearson correlations between STORI stage and all other measures were highly significant and ranged from r = 0.52 (p < 0.01) with the RAS to r = 0.62 (p < 0.01) with the PWB total scale, indicating that overall scores on the STORI are a valid measure of the recovery construct.

  Study design

  Cross-Sectional

• Lemos-Giráldez, S., García-Alvarez, L., Paino, M., Fonseca-Pedrero, E., Vallina-Fernández, O., Vallejo-Seco, G., ... & Barajas, A. (2015). Measuring stages of recovery from psychosis. Comprehensive psychiatry, 56, 51-58.

  Type of Publication

  Peer review

  Instrument Language

  Spanish

  Sample: Age (Mean and Range)

  mean = 34.74 (sd = 9.25), range: 14–52

  Sample: Age Group

  18-64 Years

  Sample: Countries/State

  Spain

  Sample: Disability Type

  Mental Health Challenges

  Sample: Gender (%male)

  male = 67 (70.5%)

  Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)

  87 (91.6%) were Spanish and 8 (7.4%) were immigrants

  Sample: Sampling Strategy

  Not Reported

  Sample: Size

  95

  Reliability: Internal Consistency

  0.86 for stage 1, 0.83 for stage 2, 0.86 for stage 3, 0.83 for stage 4, and 0.87 for stage 5

  Reliability: Test-retest

  r = 0.81

  Validity: Criterion Validity (Concurrent and Predictive)

  Pearson correlations between the STORI recovery stage subscales, and between each stage and the RSQ total score supported criterion validity evidence.

  Study design

  Cross-Sectional

• Weeks, G., Slade, M., & Hayward, M. (2011). A UK validation of the stages of recovery instrument. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 57(5), 446-454.

  Type of Publication

  Peer review

  Instrument Language

  English

  Sample: Age (Mean and Range)

  between 18 and 60 years

  Sample: Age Group

  18-64 Years

  Sample: Countries/State

  United Kingdom

  Sample: Disability Type

  Mental Health Challenges

  Sample: Gender (%male)

  male = 66%

  Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)

  White British: 24 White Non-British: 5 Black African: 7 Caribbean: 7 Other:1 Asian:4 Other:3

  Sample: Sampling Strategy

  Convenience Sample

  Sample: Size

  52

  Reliability: Internal Consistency

  values were between 0.81 and 0.87, which all being above 0.8, indicated adequate internal consistency

  Reliability: Test-retest

  κ = 0.96 for stage 1; κ = 0.9 for stage 2 κ = 0.91 for stage 3; κ = 0.92 for stage 4; κ = 0.95 for stage 5.

  Study design

  Cross-Sectional