Diana Peitz, Julia Thom, Lena Walther, Heike Hoelling, Caroline Cohrdes
{"title":"为德国成年人心理健康监测(MHS)验证沃里克-爱丁堡心理健康量表。","authors":"Diana Peitz, Julia Thom, Lena Walther, Heike Hoelling, Caroline Cohrdes","doi":"10.1186/s12955-024-02304-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mental health encompasses more than just the absence of mental disorders. Thus, a Mental Health Surveillance (MHS) and reporting system for Germany should monitor mental well-being in addition to psychopathology to capture a more complete picture of population mental health. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS) is an internationally established inventory for the integrated assessment of different aspects of mental well-being (i.e., hedonic and eudaimonic) in population samples that has not yet been validated for Germany.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using data from a cross-sectional online survey of a convenience sample of N = 1.048 adults aged 18-79 years (51% female) living in Germany, the factorial structure, measurement invariance (age, sex) and psychometric properties of the WEMWBS in its long (14 items) and short (7 items) versions were analyzed. Additionally, correlations to relevant factors (e.g., health-related quality of life, psychological distress) were investigated as indicators of criterion validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Means of model fit indices did not confirm a unidimensional factor structure for either version. The three-factor-correlative models showed moderate to good fit while the bifactor model with one general mental well-being factor and three grouping factors fitted the data best. The full range of possible responses was used for all items, and the distribution of both scales was approximately normal. Moreover, the results revealed measurement invariance across sex and age groups. Initial evidence of criterion validity was obtained. Internal consistencies were α = 0.95 and α = 0.89, respectively. Average mental well-being was comparable to that of other European countries at 3.74 for the long version and 3.84 for the short version. While there were no differences by sex, comparisons between age groups revealed higher mental well-being among the older age groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both versions of the WEMWBS showed sound psychometric characteristics in the present German sample. The findings indicate that the instrument is suitable for measuring mental well-being at the population level due to its distributional properties. These results are promising, suggesting that the scale is suitable for use in a national MHS that aims to capture positive mental health in the population as a foundation for prevention and promotion efforts within public mental health.</p>","PeriodicalId":12980,"journal":{"name":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","volume":"22 1","pages":"92"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515111/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale for the Mental Health Surveillance (MHS) of German adults.\",\"authors\":\"Diana Peitz, Julia Thom, Lena Walther, Heike Hoelling, Caroline Cohrdes\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12955-024-02304-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mental health encompasses more than just the absence of mental disorders. Thus, a Mental Health Surveillance (MHS) and reporting system for Germany should monitor mental well-being in addition to psychopathology to capture a more complete picture of population mental health. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS) is an internationally established inventory for the integrated assessment of different aspects of mental well-being (i.e., hedonic and eudaimonic) in population samples that has not yet been validated for Germany.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using data from a cross-sectional online survey of a convenience sample of N = 1.048 adults aged 18-79 years (51% female) living in Germany, the factorial structure, measurement invariance (age, sex) and psychometric properties of the WEMWBS in its long (14 items) and short (7 items) versions were analyzed. Additionally, correlations to relevant factors (e.g., health-related quality of life, psychological distress) were investigated as indicators of criterion validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Means of model fit indices did not confirm a unidimensional factor structure for either version. The three-factor-correlative models showed moderate to good fit while the bifactor model with one general mental well-being factor and three grouping factors fitted the data best. The full range of possible responses was used for all items, and the distribution of both scales was approximately normal. Moreover, the results revealed measurement invariance across sex and age groups. Initial evidence of criterion validity was obtained. Internal consistencies were α = 0.95 and α = 0.89, respectively. Average mental well-being was comparable to that of other European countries at 3.74 for the long version and 3.84 for the short version. While there were no differences by sex, comparisons between age groups revealed higher mental well-being among the older age groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both versions of the WEMWBS showed sound psychometric characteristics in the present German sample. The findings indicate that the instrument is suitable for measuring mental well-being at the population level due to its distributional properties. These results are promising, suggesting that the scale is suitable for use in a national MHS that aims to capture positive mental health in the population as a foundation for prevention and promotion efforts within public mental health.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12980,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"92\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515111/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-024-02304-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-024-02304-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Validation of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale for the Mental Health Surveillance (MHS) of German adults.
Background: Mental health encompasses more than just the absence of mental disorders. Thus, a Mental Health Surveillance (MHS) and reporting system for Germany should monitor mental well-being in addition to psychopathology to capture a more complete picture of population mental health. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS) is an internationally established inventory for the integrated assessment of different aspects of mental well-being (i.e., hedonic and eudaimonic) in population samples that has not yet been validated for Germany.
Methods: Using data from a cross-sectional online survey of a convenience sample of N = 1.048 adults aged 18-79 years (51% female) living in Germany, the factorial structure, measurement invariance (age, sex) and psychometric properties of the WEMWBS in its long (14 items) and short (7 items) versions were analyzed. Additionally, correlations to relevant factors (e.g., health-related quality of life, psychological distress) were investigated as indicators of criterion validity.
Results: Means of model fit indices did not confirm a unidimensional factor structure for either version. The three-factor-correlative models showed moderate to good fit while the bifactor model with one general mental well-being factor and three grouping factors fitted the data best. The full range of possible responses was used for all items, and the distribution of both scales was approximately normal. Moreover, the results revealed measurement invariance across sex and age groups. Initial evidence of criterion validity was obtained. Internal consistencies were α = 0.95 and α = 0.89, respectively. Average mental well-being was comparable to that of other European countries at 3.74 for the long version and 3.84 for the short version. While there were no differences by sex, comparisons between age groups revealed higher mental well-being among the older age groups.
Conclusions: Both versions of the WEMWBS showed sound psychometric characteristics in the present German sample. The findings indicate that the instrument is suitable for measuring mental well-being at the population level due to its distributional properties. These results are promising, suggesting that the scale is suitable for use in a national MHS that aims to capture positive mental health in the population as a foundation for prevention and promotion efforts within public mental health.
期刊介绍:
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal offering high quality articles, rapid publication and wide diffusion in the public domain.
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes considers original manuscripts on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) assessment for evaluation of medical and psychosocial interventions. It also considers approaches and studies on psychometric properties of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures, including cultural validation of instruments if they provide information about the impact of interventions. The journal publishes study protocols and reviews summarising the present state of knowledge concerning a particular aspect of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures. Reviews should generally follow systematic review methodology. Comments on articles and letters to the editor are welcome.