A critical interpretive synthesis of the most commonly used self-report measures in Australian mental health research

Abstract

Objective: To critically examine the self-report measures most commonly used in Australian mental health research in the last 10 years. Method: A critical interpretive synthesis was conducted using seven outcome measures that were identified as most popular in 43 studies from three mental health journals. Results: Results suggest that the amount and type of language used in outcome measures is important in both increasing the accuracy of the data collected and fostering positive experiences of data collection for participants. Conclusions: Results indicate that many of the measures most often used in Australian mental health research may not align with the current contemporary philosophy of mental health clinical practice in Australia.