People with mental disorders frequently report experiences of discrimination within mental health services, which can have significant detrimental effects on individuals’ well-being and recovery. This study aimed to develop and validate a new standardized measure aiming to assess experiences of stigmatization among people with mental disorders within mental health services.

The scale was developed in Italian and tested for ease of use, comprehension, acceptability, relevance of items and response options within focus group session. A cross-sectional validation survey was conducted among mental health service users in Italy. Exploratory factor analysis with Promax oblique rotation, the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy and the Bartlett’s test of sphericity were used to assess the suitability of the sample for factor analysis. Reliability was assessed as internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha and as test–retest reliability using weighted kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Precision was examined by Kendall’s tau-b coefficient.

Overall, 240 people with mental disorders participated in the study; 56 also completed the retest evaluation after 2 weeks. The 18 items of the scale converged over a two-factor solution (‘Dignity violation and personhood devaluation’ and ‘Perceived life restrictions and social exclusion’), accounting for 56.4% of the variance (KMO 0.903; Bartlett’s test p < 0.001). Cronbach’s alpha for the total score was 0.934. The scale showed one item with kappa above 0.81, four items between 0.61 and 0.80, ten items between 0.41 and 0.60, two items between 0.21 and 0.40 and only one item below 0.20. ICC was 0.928 (95% CI 0.877–0.958). Kendall’s tau-b ranged from 0.450 to 0.617 (p < 0.001).

The newly developed scale represents a valid and reliable measure for assessing experiences of stigma among patients receiving care within mental health services. The scale has provided initial evidence of being specifically tailored for individuals with psychotic and bipolar disorders. However, the factorial structure of the scale should be replicated through a confirmatory factor analysis on a larger sample of individuals with these conditions.

To develop and validate two new standardised measures assessing, respectively, experienced discrimination (Covid-19 Experienced DISCrimination scale, CEDISC) and internalised stigma (COvid-19 INternalised Stigma scale, COINS) in people who had been infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or had developed coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) disease.

Both the CEDISC and the COINS were developed in Italian and tested for ease of use, comprehension, acceptability, the relevance of items and response options within a focus group session. Online cross-sectional validation survey was conducted among adults infected with SARS-CoV-2 or who developed Covid-19 disease, members of a closed Facebook discussion group in Italy. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with Promax oblique rotation; the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy and the Bartlett's test of sphericity were used to assess the suitability of the sample for factor analysis. Reliability was assessed as internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha and as test–retest reliability using weighted kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Precision was examined by Kendall's tau-b coefficient.

Overall, 579 participants completed the CEDISC, 519 also completed the COINS, 155 completed the retest for both scales after two weeks. The 12 items of the CEDISC converged over a 2-factor solution (‘social life’ and ‘close relations’) accounting for 49.2% of the variance (KMO = 0.894; Bartlett's test p < 0.001); the 13 items of the COINS converged over a 3-factor solution (‘self-perception’, ‘close relations’ and ‘social life’) accounting for 67.7% (KMO = 0.827; Bartlett's test p < 0.001). Cronbach's α was 0.848 for the CEDISC, and 0.837 for the COINS. The CEDISC showed three items (25%) with kappa between 0.61 and 0.80 and seven (58.4%) between 0.41 and 0.60, with only two items scoring 0.21 and 0.40; the COINS had ten items (76.9%) with kappa ranging from 0.41 to 0.60, and three items below 0.31. ICC was 0.906 (95% CI, 0.871–0.932) for the, CEDISC and 0.860 (95% CI, 0.808–0.898) for the COINS. Kendall's tau-b ranged from 0.360 to 0.556 (p < 0.001) for the CEDISC and from 0.290 to 0.606 (p < 0.001) for the COINS.

Both the CEDISC and the COINS are two valid and reliable scales to be used in studies examining the role of stigma and discrimination of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 and Covid-19 patients, and in research evaluating interventions designed to mitigate stigma in this population.

Growing literature suggests that the sense of coherence (SOC) positively influences well-being in later life.

This study reports the assessment the following psychometric properties: distributional properties, construct, criterion and external-related validities, and reliability, of the Orientation to Life Questionnaire (OtLQ) in an cross-national population of older adults.

We recruited 1291 community-dwelling older adults aged between 75-102 years (M=83.9; SD=6.68). Convenience sampling was used to gather questionnaire data. The construct validity was asserted by confirmatory factor analysis, convergent and discriminant validity. Moreover, criterion and external-related validities, as well as distributional properties and reliability were also tested.

Data gathered with the 29-items OtLQ scale showed overall good psychometric properties, in terms of distributional properties, construct, criterion and external-related validities, as well as reliability. Three factors were validated for the OtLQ scale: (a) comprehensibility; (b) manageability; and (c) meaningfulness.

We validated the 3-factor OtLQ scale, which produced valid and reliable data for a cross-national sample with older adults. Hence, it is an adequate instrument for assessing sense of coherence among older people in health care practice and program development contexts.

Many instruments have been developed and validated to assess the stigma associated with mental disorders and its various domains across different populations. To our knowledge, the Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale (RIBS) is the only validated questionnaire to analyse the presence of reported and intended stigmatising/discriminatory behaviours towards people with mental health problems in the general population. The aims of the study presented herein are to translate and validate the RIBS in Italian language and to adapt it to the Italian socio-cultural background (RIBS-I).

The RIBS considers reported and intended behaviours across four different domains: (1) living with, (2) working with, (3) living nearby and (4) continuing a relationship with someone with a mental health problem. The validation process included four phases: (1) translation/back translation of the questionnaire from English to Italian and vice versa; (2,3) face validity and reliability of RIBS-I; (4) description of model fit through confirmatory factor analysis. The questionnaire was administered to a sample of the general public via distribution in public places such as shopping centres, markets, squares, cinemas and other gathering places. Questionnaires were administered by trained mental health professionals.

A total of 447 lay respondents were recruited. The mean age was 38.08 (s.d. = ±14.74) years. Fifty-seven per cent of the sample (n = 257) were female. The Cronbach alpha of RIBS-I was 0.83. All indices of model fit were above the reference values: Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.987 (GFI > 0.9); Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) = 0.975 (AGFI > 0.9); Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.994 (CFI > 0.9); and Root-Mean-Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.023 (RMSEA < 0.05). The χ2 = 23.60 (df = 19; p = 0.21) and χ2/df = 1.24 supported the model.

The RIBS-I demonstrated good psychometric properties and it can be considered a useful tool to: (1) assess stigmatising (actual or potential) behaviours in the general population; (2) test the efficacy of anti-stigma campaigns and actions; (3) design further studies to better understand the relationship between the three different components of stigmatisation: knowledge, attitudes and behaviours.

To assess the perceived outcomes associated with diet/food intake in the general adult population.

The Food Benefits Assessment (FBA©) questionnaire was developed from subjects’ verbatim transcripts (n 18) and after comprehension tests (n 5). Normal-weight (n 130) and overweight (n 67) subjects then completed the final questionnaire twice, 7 d apart. Psychometric properties were assessed, including construct validity by principal components analysis (PCA), concurrent validity (Spearman coefficient) with the Short Form-36 scale (SF-36), known-group validity by comparing FBA dimension scores according to lifestyle and clinical variables, internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s α) and test–retest reproducibility in stable subjects over 1 week (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC).

PCA and Multitrait analysis confirmed the final version of the FBA comprising forty-one items split into seven dimensions (vitality; digestive comfort; physical appearance; well-being; snacking; disease prevention; aesthetics). All dimensions displayed good item convergent validity (0·44 to 0·80), good concurrent validity (highest correlation between well-being dimension of FBA and mental health scale of SF-36, r = 0·83) and good known-group validity and reproducibility (ICC ≥ 0·76); internal consistency reliability was good to excellent (Cronbach’s α = 0·79 to 0·91).

The FBA is the first valid and reliable questionnaire that allows the assessment of diet effects and impact as perceived by subjects. It is a good candidate in the nutrition field for further use in specific population settings and with a particular food or daily diet. Linguistically validated English (UK and US) and German versions of the questionnaire are available.