A systematic review evaluating the psychometric properties of measures of social inclusion

PLOS ONE, Dec 2019

Introduction Improving social inclusion opportunities for population health has been identified as a priority area for international policy. There is a need to comprehensively examine and evaluate the quality of psychometric properties of measures of social inclusion that are used to guide social policy and outcomes. Objective To conduct a systematic review of the literature on all current measures of social inclusion for any population group, to evaluate the quality of the psychometric properties of identified measures, and to evaluate if they capture the construct of social inclusion. Methods A systematic search was performed using five electronic databases: CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase, ERIC and Pubmed and grey literature were sourced to identify measures of social inclusion. The psychometric properties of the social inclusion measures were evaluated against the COSMIN taxonomy of measurement properties using pre-set psychometric criteria. Results Of the 109 measures identified, twenty-five measures, involving twenty-five studies and one manual met the inclusion criteria. The overall quality of the reviewed measures was variable, with the Social and Community Opportunities Profile-Short, Social Connectedness Scale and the Social Inclusion Scale demonstrating the strongest evidence for sound psychometric quality. The most common domain included in the measures was connectedness (21), followed by participation (19); the domain of citizenship was covered by the least number of measures (10). No single instrument measured all aspects within the three domains of social inclusion. Of the measures with sound psychometric evidence, the Social and Community Opportunities Profile-Short captured the construct of social inclusion best. Conclusions The overall quality of the psychometric properties demonstrate that the current suite of available instruments for the measurement of social inclusion are promising but need further refinement. There is a need for a universal working definition of social inclusion as an overarching construct for ongoing research in the area of the psychometric properties of social inclusion instruments.

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0179109&type=printable

A systematic review evaluating the psychometric properties of measures of social inclusion

June A systematic review evaluating the psychometric properties of measures of social inclusion Reinie Cordier 0 1 Ben Milbourn 0 1 Robyn Martin 0 1 Angus Buchanan 0 1 Donna Chung 0 1 Rene e Speyer 1 0 School of Occupational Therapy and Social Work, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University , Perth, Western Australia , Australia , 2 College of Healthcare Sciences, James Cook University , Townsville, Queensland , Australia 1 Editor: Andre M. N. Renzaho, Western Sydney University , AUSTRALIA Improving social inclusion opportunities for population health has been identified as a priority area for international policy. There is a need to comprehensively examine and evaluate the quality of psychometric properties of measures of social inclusion that are used to guide social policy and outcomes. - Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are within the paper. Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work. Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Objective Methods Results To conduct a systematic review of the literature on all current measures of social inclusion for any population group, to evaluate the quality of the psychometric properties of identified measures, and to evaluate if they capture the construct of social inclusion. A systematic search was performed using five electronic databases: CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase, ERIC and Pubmed and grey literature were sourced to identify measures of social inclusion. The psychometric properties of the social inclusion measures were evaluated against the COSMIN taxonomy of measurement properties using pre-set psychometric criteria. Of the 109 measures identified, twenty-five measures, involving twenty-five studies and one manual met the inclusion criteria. The overall quality of the reviewed measures was variable, with the Social and Community Opportunities Profile-Short, Social Connectedness Scale and the Social Inclusion Scale demonstrating the strongest evidence for sound psychometric quality. The most common domain included in the measures was connectedness (21), followed by participation (19); the domain of citizenship was covered by the least number of measures (10). No single instrument measured all aspects within the three domains of social inclusion. Of the measures with sound psychometric evidence, the Social and Community Opportunities Profile-Short captured the construct of social inclusion best. Conclusions The overall quality of the psychometric properties demonstrate that the current suite of available instruments for the measurement of social inclusion are promising but need further refinement. There is a need for a universal working definition of social inclusion as an overarching construct for ongoing research in the area of the psychometric properties of social inclusion instruments. Introduction The concepts of social inclusion and exclusion focus on health, social, cultural and income inequalities and imbalances [ 1 ]. The term social inclusion is used in social policy and practice documents to highlight the importance of engagement and participation in society as a means of improving quality of life and reducing social isolation [ 2 ]. This is because communities that actively include and support individuals and groups to participate in valued social, economic and cultural activities are likely to be healthier than those where people face insecurity, exclusion and deprivation [ 3 ]. In order to further develop evidence about the ways in which forms of social inclusion can impact on the wellbeing of individuals, families and communities, it is important to accurately measure and report on what constitutes social inclusion. This paper sets out to consider how the concept of social inclusion has been deployed in policy and practice, how the construct has been operationalised as measures, and identifies the quality of the psychometric properties underpinning the evidence base. This will enable policy makers and practitioners to take a more evidence based approach to evaluating social inclusion initiatives in the future. Social inclusion: History and definition of the concept The term social inclusion has been used variously in international social policy and academia; indicating an underpinning policy and practice intent. There is debate about what defines social inclusion, largely due to differences in theoretical and political perspectives. It has also been used interchangeably at times with concepts such as social and cultural capital. Due to this lack of consensus on definition and conceptualisation, the operationalisation and measurement of social inclusion has not been straightforward. In order to examine the emergence of social inclusion, an inspection of the theories, policies and practices which underpin both inclusion and exclusion is required. While social exclusion and inclusion are often framed as binary opposites, some would suggest the concep (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0179109&type=printable

Reinie Cordier, Ben Milbourn, Robyn Martin, Angus Buchanan, Donna Chung, Renée Speyer. A systematic review evaluating the psychometric properties of measures of social inclusion, PLOS ONE, 2017, Volume 12, Issue 6, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0179109