Open AccessThe reliability and validity of the forensic Camberwell Assessment of Need (CANFOR): a needs assessment for forensic mental health service users
Author(s) -
Thomas Stuart D. M.,
Slade Mike,
Mccrone Paul,
Harty MariAnne,
Parrott Janet,
Thornicroft Graham,
Leese Morven
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
international journal of methods in psychiatric research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.275
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1557-0657
pISSN - 1049-8931
DOI - 10.1002/mpr.235
Subject(s) - reliability (semiconductor) , mental health , service (business) , scale (ratio) , mental health service , needs assessment , rating scale , psychology , forensic science , validity , forensic psychiatry , content validity , medicine , psychiatry , applied psychology , clinical psychology , psychometrics , business , social science , power (physics) , developmental psychology , physics , quantum mechanics , veterinary medicine , marketing , sociology
No instrument exists that measures the individual needs of forensic mental health service users (FMHSUs). The aim of this study was therefore to develop a valid and reliable individual needs assessment instrument for FMHSUs that incorporated staff and service user views and measured met and unmet needs. The Camberwell Assessment of Need was used as a template to develop CANFOR. Consensual and content validity were investigated with 50 forensic mental health professionals and 60 FMHSUs. Both were found to be satisfactory. Concurrent validity was tested using the Global Assessment of Functioning and a five‐point needs scale, and again was found to be satisfactory. Reliability studies were carried out with 77 service users and 65 staff in high and medium security psychiatric services in the UK. Inter‐rater reliability, rating whether a need was present or not, was high for service users (0.991) and staff (0.998). Similarly high reliability was found for unmet needs (0.985 and 0.972, respectively). Test–retest reliability was found to be moderately high for service users (0.795) and staff (0.852) when ratings were made two weeks apart. Similar levels were found for ratings of unmet needs (0.813 and 0.699, respectively). The average interview time was 23 minutes. CANFOR has good validity and reliability, and is suitable for further testing with other service user groups. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.