We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.

Durham Research Online
You are in:

Measuring mental health in the clinical setting : what is important to service users? The Mini-Service user Recovery Evaluation scale (Mini-SeRvE).

Barber, Joanna M. and Parsons, Helen and Wilson, Carol A. and Cook, Christopher C.H. (2017) 'Measuring mental health in the clinical setting : what is important to service users? The Mini-Service user Recovery Evaluation scale (Mini-SeRvE).', Journal of mental health., 26 (6). pp. 530-537.


Background: Since 2001, a policy of positive mental health recovery has been promoted in the UK, with service user involvement. This has not been easy to implement in the clinical setting. Aims: To develop and validate a brief self-report, service user-designed, outcome measure (Mini-SeRvE), for clinical use, including spiritual and religious issues. Methods: From the previously developed Service user Recovery Evaluation scale (SeRvE), 15 questions were selected for Mini-SeRvE which was self-completed by 207 people; 100 service users and, for comparison, 107 staff. Results were analysed using SPSS software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). Results: Mini-SeRvE is reliable, Cronbach’s alpha 0.852. Correlation with another recovery scale, Mental Health Recovery Measure, was high, r = 0.819. Three reliable subscales emerged; existential well-being (EWB), mental ill-being (MIB) and religious well-being (RWB). Scores of the EWB and MIB subscales were higher for staff, consistent with higher mental well-being. Religious well-being scores were higher in service users, who also rated religion as more important to them. Conclusions: Mini-SeRvE is a valid measure of service user recovery. The importance of religion/spiritual belief for our users is highlighted, this being reflected in the subject matter of Mini-SeRvE. Mini-SeRvE assessments could show individual priorities, evaluate therapy and aid clinical decision-making.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(AM) Accepted Manuscript
Download PDF
Publisher Web site:
Publisher statement:This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in Journal of Mental Health on 04/07/2017, available online at:
Date accepted:22 March 2017
Date deposited:09 May 2017
Date of first online publication:04 July 2017
Date first made open access:04 January 2019

Save or Share this output

Look up in GoogleScholar