McGuire, Alan B.Luther, LaurenWhite, DominiqueWhite, Laura M.McGrew, John H.Salyers, Michelle P.2016-10-282016-10-282016-01McGuire, A. B., Luther, L., White, D., White, L. M., McGrew, J., & Salyers, M. P. (2016). The “critical” elements of illness management and recovery: comparing methodological approaches. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 43(1), 1-10.https://hdl.handle.net/1805/11281This study examined three methodological approaches to defining the critical elements of Illness Management and Recovery (IMR), a curriculum-based approach to recovery. Sixty-seven IMR experts rated the criticality of 16 IMR elements on three dimensions: defining, essential, and impactful. Three elements (Recovery Orientation, Goal Setting and Follow-up, and IMR Curriculum) met all criteria for essential and defining and all but the most stringent criteria for impactful. Practitioners should consider competence in these areas as preeminent. The remaining 13 elements met varying criteria for essential and impactful. Findings suggest that criticality is a multifaceted construct, necessitating judgments about model elements across different criticality dimensions.enPublisher Policycritical elementsfidelityillness management and recoveryArticle