The Mental Health Literacy and Prevention Survey (mHELP): a brief measure for assessing gatekeepers' mental health literacy in prevention research.

Confirmatory factor analyses provided initial support for a five-factor structure of the mHELP instrument.

• The sample consisted of N = 556 teachers in Germany using baseline data.
• The five factors are: Knowledge, Self-reported helping behavior, Emotional understanding, Stigma, and Confidence.
• Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were used to examine the factor structure.
• The instrument was developed as a brief and multidimensional measure suitable for prevention and implementation research.

Internal consistency reliability was good for the total score and for three of five subscales, but weaker for two subscales.

• Good reliability was found for the total score as well as for the Knowledge, Self-reported helping behavior, and Emotional understanding subscales.
• The Stigma and Confidence subscales showed weaker psychometric performance.
• Split-half reliability of the total score was described as high.
• The authors note the total score is 'currently appearing to be the most robust indicator.'

Test-retest reliability over a 6-month period was moderate.

• The test-retest reliability assessment spanned 6 months.
• Reliability over this period was characterized as moderate.
• This finding suggests some stability of the measure over time but also points to a limitation given moderate rather than high stability.
• Further validation including sensitivity to change is noted as needed.

Initial construct validity was supported by expected associations with established measures of mental health knowledge and stigma.

• Associations with established measures of mental health knowledge and stigma were in the expected direction.
• Low correlations with symptom measures provided preliminary evidence of discriminant validity.
• These findings suggest the mHELP measures constructs distinct from general symptom measures.
• The authors describe this as 'initial evidence of construct validity.'

The Stigma and Confidence subscales demonstrated weaker psychometric properties and require further refinement.

• These two subscales showed weaker psychometric performance compared to Knowledge, Self-reported helping behavior, and Emotional understanding.
• The authors explicitly state that separate interpretation of Stigma and Confidence subscales 'cannot be recommended' at this stage.
• Refinement of these subscales is identified as a priority for future development.
• The total score is recommended as the more robust indicator pending subscale refinement.

The mHELP instrument includes emotional understanding as a practice-informed component distinguishing it from existing mental health literacy measures.

• Emotional understanding is included as one of the five subscales and is described as 'a practice-informed component.'
• The authors note this integration 'may complement existing approaches while remaining practical for prevention research.'
• Existing measures are characterized as often assessing 'only selected aspects of the construct or have not been comprehensively validated.'
• The instrument targets gatekeepers such as teachers and other professionals who work with young people.

Further validation of the mHELP is identified as needed, including subscale refinement, sensitivity to change, and testing in more diverse and international samples.

• The current validation was conducted exclusively with teachers in Germany (N = 556).
• Limitations include the need to test sensitivity to change, which is important for evaluating prevention program effectiveness.
• International and more diverse samples are explicitly cited as a future validation need.
• The authors describe the current findings as providing 'initial support' rather than definitive validation.