Standardised instruments are available that measure concepts closely related to clinical recovery (e.g. PANSS [
17]), and societal recovery (MANSA, HoNOS [
18,
19]), as well as a growing battery of personal recovery measures [
20]. The need for an integrated view of recovery is widely shared, and several researchers are working to develop more integrated recovery measures, however, they are hardly validated or available yet [
21]. The Individual Recovery Outcomes Counter [
22] was developed for this purpose.
The I.ROC is divided into four domains forming the acronym HOPE (Home, Opportunity, People, and Empowerment) and contains twelve topics related to clinical (item 1,4,5), societal (item 2,3,6,7,8) and personal (item 9,10,11,12) recovery. Eight I.ROC-items (3, 6–12) cover personal recovery and some elements of societal recovery correspond to the five themes of the CHIME framework. The twelve items contain the following indicators: mental health, life skills, safety and comfort, physical health, exercise and activity, purpose and direction, personal network, social network, valuing myself, participation and control, self-management, and hope for the future. Unlike most recovery measures, the I.ROC was developed to initiate a dialogue on recovery. It can be used to help formulate personalized recovery goals and guides care in line with these goals [
22]. Recovery can be seen as a journey as well as an outcome, by repeatedly administering the I.ROC, the recovery process becomes visible and treatment can be adjusted based on the results of the I.ROC. I.ROC results are visually presented in a spidergram showing individual areas of personal strength, unmet needs, and individual changes over time. This enables the service user and professional to work together on the recovery process [
22]. Preliminary validation testing of the I.ROC (N = 170) took place in Scotland, with participants in the community receiving support from Penumbra. Participants’ most frequently self-reported mental illness diagnoses were common mental health problems such as depression and/or anxiety [
24]. Results showed the I.ROC to have good internal consistency (α = 0.86). Comparative validity showed that the I.ROC scores are significantly positively correlated to scores of the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS, r = .72, p < .001). In comparison to the BASIS-32 (Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale; [
25] a significant negative correlation was found (r = -.60, p < .001). Initial exploratory factor analysis revealed two underlying factors, labelled as intrapersonal and interpersonal recovery [
24], however, a later Rasch analysis [
26] on a much larger sample implicates that the I.ROC represents a unidimensional construct. Rasch analysis is based on the item response theory, rather than classical test theory, and focuses on the fit between the actual score and the predicted score form the Rasch model [
26]. Within the Netherlands, the I.ROC has been validated for a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting [
27], showing psychometric properties comparable to previous studies and some evidence for sensitivity to change is found. They conclude that the I.ROC is a valid and reliable instrument to measure recovery in low-intensity community mental healthcare, but information about its use in people receiving high-intensity community care, diagnosed with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder, is lacking. The aim of this study is to examine the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the I.ROC in a sample of participants with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder. In this study we compare the I.ROC with several frequently used measures of clinical, societal and personal recovery, and quality of life.