Psychometric properties of the Group Climate Instrument (GCI) in individuals with mild intellectual disability or borderline intellectual functioning.
E G Neimeijer, J J Roest, G H P van der Helm and 1 others
PMID 30456768WHAT IT FOUND
An adapted questionnaire showed preliminary ability to measure ward climate for people with mild intellectual disability or borderline intellectual functioning in secure care.
It grouped into four parts and matched clients' ratings, but it has not been tested at ward level or linked to outcomes.
Key findings
01The adapted questionnaire produced four related subscales and an overall climate score that fitted the data acceptably.
02Scores on support, growth and atmosphere moved in the same direction as matching single-item ratings, while repression moved in the opposite direction.
03A substantial part of the variation in climate scores was between living groups.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study used data from one secure treatment facility, so results may not generalise to other settings or community services. Only 208 of 441 residents participated, a 47 percent response rate, and 19 were excluded for missing IQ data. The authors used single-level factor analysis because the sample was too small for multilevel analysis, so the ward-level factor structure is not yet established. Convergent validity was checked with single-item ratings rather than another validated climate instrument. One repression item was deleted to improve model fit, so the final 28-item version needs further confirmation. Participants may have misunderstood some questions or given socially desirable answers, although the authors tried to reduce these risks. The study did not measure treatment outcomes, so it cannot show that a better GCI score predicts better care.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. The research was funded in part by an aNWOSia-Raak grant: 'Met kleine stapjes maar wel vooruit'.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that this questionnaire has been validated for comparing wards or that a better ward climate score will improve treatment. The study checked measurement properties in one facility and did not use multilevel analysis or measure clinical outcomes.