What are the minimal sample size requirements for Mokken scaling? An empirical example with the Warwick- Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Watson R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8114397 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThere is increasing international interest in the concept of mental well-being and its contribution to all aspects of human life. Demand for instruments to monitor mental well-being at a population level and evaluate mental health promotion initiatives is growing. This article describes the development and validation of a new scale, comprised only of positively worded items relating to different aspects of positive mental health: the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS).MethodsWEMWBS was developed by an expert panel drawing on current academic literature, qualitative research with focus groups, and psychometric testing of an existing scale. It was validated on a student and representative population sample. Content validity was assessed by reviewing the frequency of complete responses and the distribution of responses to each item. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the hypothesis that the scale measured a single construct. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Criterion validity was explored in terms of correlations between WEMWBS and other scales and by testing whether the scale discriminated between population groups in line with pre-specified hypotheses. Test-retest reliability was assessed at one week using intra-class correlation coefficients. Susceptibility to bias was measured using the Balanced Inventory of Desired Responding.ResultsWEMWBS showed good content validity. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the single factor hypothesis. A Cronbach's alpha score of 0.89 (student sample) and 0.91 (population sample) suggests some item redundancy in the scale. WEMWBS showed high correlations with other mental health and well-being scales and lower correlations with scales measuring overall health. Its distribution was near normal and the scale did not show ceiling effects in a population sample. It discriminated between population groups in a way that is largely consistent with the results of other population surveys. Test-retest reliability at one week was high (0.83). Social desirability bias was lower or similar to that of other comparable scales.ConclusionWEMWBS is a measure of mental well-being focusing entirely on positive aspects of mental health. As a short and psychometrically robust scale, with no ceiling effects in a population sample, it offers promise as a tool for monitoring mental well-being at a population level. Whilst WEMWBS should appeal to those evaluating mental health promotion initiatives, it is important that the scale's sensitivity to change is established before it is recommended in this context.
| S-EPMC2222612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWell-being is an important aspect of people's lives and can be considered as an index of social progress. The Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-being scale (WEMWBS) was developed to capture subjective mental well-being. It is a widely tested measure of mental well-being at the population level and has 14 items and a short-form with 7 items. This study was carried out to culturally validate and adapt the WEMWBS among a Sinhala speaking population in Sri Lanka.MethodsA forward and backward translation of the scale into Sinhala was done followed by a cognitive interview. The translated and culturally adapted scale and other mental health scales were administered to a sample of 294 persons between the ages of 17-73 using a paper-based version (n = 210) and an online survey (n = 84). Internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability were tested. Construct validity, and convergent and discriminant validity were assessed using the total sample.ResultsThe translated questionnaire had good face and content validity. Internal consistency reliability was 0.91 and 0.84 for the 14-item and 7-item scales, respectively. Test-retest reliability over two weeks was satisfactory (Spearman r = 0.72 p < 0.001). Confirmatory factor analysis supported a one factor model. Convergent validity was assessed using WHO-5 well-being index (Spearman r = 0.67, p < 0.001), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) (Spearman r = (-0.45), p < 0.001) and Kessler psychological distress scale (K10) (Spearman r = (-0.55), p < 0.001).ConclusionsThe translated and culturally adapted Sinhala version of the WEMWBS has acceptable psychometric properties to assess mental well-being at the population level among the Sinhala speaking population in Sri Lanka.
| S-EPMC9400250 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe aimed to validate the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) among English speaking adults representing two of the minority ethnic groups living in the UK, self-identified as Chinese or Pakistani by background, in a mixed methods study.MethodsQuantitative data were collected in two cities in the West Midlands, UK. Item response, dimensionality, internal consistency, and construct validity of the WEMWBS were assessed in Chinese and Pakistani groups separately, using data from both cities combined.Qualitative data were collected in the first city in eight focus groups of different ages recruited by the community workers. Three mixed sex Chinese and five single sex Pakistani groups discussed ease of completion and comprehension of items, together with overall reactions to the scale and underlying concept.Results of quantitative and qualitative analysis were examined for commonalities and differences.ResultsItem completion and item total correlations were satisfactory in both groups. In the Chinese data, Exploratory Factor Analysis showed a single factor with loadings ranging from 0.60 to 0.82 for all 14 items. In the Pakistani data, three factors reached statistical significance; however, a substantial drop in eigenvalues between the first and second factors and the limited variance explained by the second and third factors supported a one-factor model. All items loaded on this factor from 0.51 to 0.83.In the Chinese and Pakistani data respectively, Cronbach's alpha was 0.92 (0.89 - 0.94) and 0.91 (0.88 - 0.94); Spearman's correlation with GHQ-12 was - 0.63 (-0.73 to -0.49) and -0.55 (-0.70 to -0.36), and with the WHO-5 0.62 (0.46-0.75) and 0.64 (0.50 to 0.76).Qualitative analysis revealed good comprehension and ease of completion of almost all items. Some culturally determined differences in understanding of mental well-being, which varied both between and within communities, emerged.ConclusionsThe WEMWBS was well received by members of both Pakistani and Chinese communities. It showed high levels of consistency and reliability compared with accepted criteria. Data were sufficiently strong to recommend the WEMWBS for use in general population surveys.
| S-EPMC3610169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background. There is growing awareness of the public health importance of mental well-being both in the general population and in specific groups. The well-being of health professionals is likely to influence the quality of the care they deliver. This study was carried out to examine the well-being of Pakistani healthcare professionals, and to evaluate the psychometric performance of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) in this population. Methods. A cross-sectional survey was carried out from June, 2013 to December, 2014 among 1,271 Pakistani health care providers (HCPs) working in seven different cities in Punjab province, Pakistan, to examine the acceptability, internal consistency, test-retest reliability and content and construct validity of the English version of the WEMWBS in a Pakistani population sample. All data were analyzed in SPSS v. 21. Results. Our analysis demonstrated unidimensional construct validity, high internal consistency (0.89) and test-retest reliability, good validity and easy readability of WEMWBS in our sample of Pakistani HCPs. The mean WEMWBS score was 48.1 (SD 9.4), which is lower than in the general population in other countries. Male HCPs scored significantly higher on the WEMWBS than their female counterparts (P < 0.05), and older respondents had higher scores. Conclusion. The WEMWBS appears acceptable for use in Pakistani HCPs, and findings from this study verify its validity and internal consistency for this population sample. Our respondents had lower well-being scores than those reported in general population surveys in the UK.
| S-EPMC4636413 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe topic of adolescent mental health is currently a subject of much debate due to the increasing prevalence of mental health problems among this age group. Therefore, it is crucial to have high-quality and validated mental well-being measurement tools. While such tools do exist, they are often not tailored specifically to adolescents and are not available in Czech language. The aim of this study is to validate and test the Czech version of the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (SWEMWBS) on a large sample of Czech adolescents aged 15 to 18 years.MethodsThe analysis is based on data from the first wave of the Czech Education Panel Survey (CZEPS) and was mainly conducted using Item Response Theory (IRT), which is the most appropriate method for this type of analysis. Specifically, the Graded Response Model (GRM) was applied to the data. This comprehensive validation study also included reliability and three types of validity (construct, convergent and criterion) testing.ResultsThe study found that the Czech version of the SWEMWBS for adolescents aged 15 to 18 years (N = 22,498) has good quality and psychometric properties. The data was analysed using the GRM model as it met the assumptions for the use of IRT. The estimated parameter values by GRM demonstrated good discriminant and informative power for all items, except for item 7, which showed poorer results compared to the others. However, excluding it from the scale would not enhance the overall quality of the scale. The five-category response scale functions effectively. Additionally, the results demonstrated high reliability, and all types of validity tested were also confirmed.ConclusionsThe Czech version of the SWEMWBS for adolescents has been validated as a psychometrically sound, reliable and valid instrument for measuring mental well-being. It can therefore be used with confidence in future studies.
| S-EPMC11331616 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMiddle and late adolescence is the period in a person's life that is most vulnerable to mental health problems. To enable an evidence base that can support policies to prevent such problems, it is crucial to have good quality, reliable, and accurate measurement tools for mental well-being. One of them is the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (SWEMWBS). This study aimed to test the psychometric properties of the SWEMWBS on a large sample of adolescents aged 16 to 19 from the United Kingdom (UK) (N = 8,090). Data were from four waves of the longitudinal panel study Understanding Society.MethodsThe analysis was conducted using Item Response Theory (IRT), which is the most appropriate method for testing psychometric properties. The Graded Response Model (GRM) was applied to the data. The reliability and criterion validity of the SWEMWBS were also examined.ResultsThe presented results confirm the very good psychometric properties of the SWEMWBS amongst adolescents aged 16 to 19 years. The assumptions for the use (unidimensionality, local non-independence, monotonicity) of IRT were met. The results of GRM showed very high discriminant power for all items. The five-category response scale performed optimally; however, differences were found between points on the response scale both between and within items. In general, the scale as a whole showed very good functioning, but particularly in the negative values of mental well-being.ConclusionsThe SWEMWBS was confirmed as a concise, reliable, and valid instrument for measuring mental well-being among older UK adolescents.
| S-EPMC10540427 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) is a commonly used scale of mental wellbeing focusing entirely on the positive aspect of mental health. It has been widely used in a broad range of clinical and research settings, including to evaluate if interventions, programmes or pilots improve wellbeing. We aimed to systematically review all interventions that used WEMWBS and evaluate which interventions are the most effective at improving wellbeing.MethodsEligible populations included children and adults, with no health or age restrictions. Any intervention study was eligible if the wellbeing outcome was measured using the 7 or 14-item WEMWBS scale assessed both pre- and post-intervention. We identified eligible intervention studies using three approaches: a database search (Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PyschInfo and Web of Science from January 2007 to present), grey literature search, and by issuing a call for evidence. Narrative synthesis and random-effects meta-analysis of standardised mean differences in the intervention group were used to summarise intervention effects on WEMWBS score.ResultsWe identified 223 interventions across 209 studies, with a total of 53,834 participants across all studies. Five main themes of interventions were synthesised: psychological (n = 80); social (n = 54); arts, culture and environment (n = 29); physical health promotion (n = 18); and other (n = 28). Psychological interventions based on resilience, wellbeing or self-management techniques had the strongest effect on wellbeing. A broad range of other interventions were effective at improving mental wellbeing, including other psychological interventions such as cognitive behavioural therapy, psychoeducation and mindfulness. Medium to strong effects were also seen for person-centred support/advice (social), arts-based, parenting (social) and social prescribing interventions. However, a major limitation of the evidence was that only 75 (36%) of studies included a control group.ConclusionsWEMWBS has been widely used to assess wellbeing across a diverse range of interventions, settings and samples. Despite substantial heterogeneity in individual intervention design, delivery and groups targeted, results indicate that a broad range of intervention types can successfully improve wellbeing. Methodological changes, such as greater use of control groups in intervention evaluation, can help future researchers and policy makers further understand what works for mental wellbeing.
| S-EPMC9737992 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe mental well-being of patients with chronic heart failure is likely to influence their health-related quality of life and decrease the utilization of public health resources. This study assessed the mental well-being of patients with chronic heart failure and evaluated the reliability and validity of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey from July 2016 to July 2017 among 191 patients with chronic heart failure, and examined psychometric properties of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale, such as internal consistency, reliability, test-retest reliability, and factorial validity of the Chinese version of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale.ResultsOne-dimensional construct validity was demonstrated by confirmatory factor analysis. The psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale were satisfactory in our sample of patients with chronic heart failure. The internal consistency reliability was .948 and the test-retest reliability .925. The item-total correlations ranged from .405 to .872. There was a strong correlation (r = .79) between the Chinese version of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale and the five-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index. The Chinese version of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale appears acceptable for use in patients with chronic heart failure, and we were able to verify its reliability and validity with our sample.ConclusionsThe Chinese version of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale is a reliable quantitative tool for evaluating mental well-being in patients with chronic heart failure in clinical settings, and this has important implications for overall assessments of mental well-being in patients with chronic heart failure.
| S-EPMC6440095 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS) was developed to meet demand for instruments to measure mental well-being. It comprises 14 positively phrased Likert-style items and fulfils classic criteria for scale development. We report here the internal construct validity of WEMWBS from the perspective of the Rasch measurement model.MethodsThe model was applied to data collected from 779 respondents in Wave 12 (Autumn 2006) of the Scottish Health Education Population Survey. Respondents were aged 16-74 (average 41.9) yrs.ResultsInitial fit to model expectations was poor. The items 'I've been feeling good about myself', 'I've been interested in new things' and 'I've been feeling cheerful' all showed significant misfit to model expectations, and were deleted. This led to a marginal improvement in fit to the model. After further analysis, more items were deleted and a strict unidimensional seven item scale (the Short Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (SWEMWBS)) was resolved. Many items deleted because of misfit with model expectations showed considerable bias for gender. Two retained items also demonstrated bias for gender but, at the scale level, cancelled out. One further retained item 'I've been feeling optimistic about the future' showed bias for age. The correlation between the 14 item and 7 item versions was 0.954.Given fit to the Rasch model, and strict unidimensionality, SWEMWBS provides an interval scale estimate of mental well-being.ConclusionA short 7 item version of WEMWBS was found to satisfy the strict unidimensionality expectations of the Rasch model, and be largely free of bias. This scale, SWEMWBS, provides a raw score-interval scale transformation for use in parametric procedures. In terms of face validity, SWEMWBS presents a more restricted view of mental well-being than the 14 item WEMWBS, with most items representing aspects of psychological and eudemonic well-being, and few covering hedonic well-being or affect. However, robust measurement properties combined with brevity make SWEMWBS preferable to WEMWBS at present for monitoring mental well-being in populations. Where face validity is an issue there remain arguments for continuing to collect data on the full 14 item WEMWBS.
| S-EPMC2669062 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS), 14 positively worded statements, is a validated instrument to measure mental wellbeing on a population level. Less is known about the population distribution of the shorter seven-item version (SWEMWBS) or its performance as an instrument to measure wellbeing.MethodsUsing the Health Survey for England 2010-2013 (n = 27,169 adults aged 16+, nationally representative of the population), age- and sex-specific norms were estimated using means and percentiles. Criterion validity was examined using: (1) Spearman correlations (ρ) for SWEMWBS with General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), happiness index, EQ-VAS (2) a multinomial logit model with SWEMWBS (low, medium and high wellbeing) as the outcome and demographic, social and health behaviours as explanatory variables. Relative validity was examined by comparing SWEMWBS with WEMWBS using: (1) Spearman correlations (continuous data), and (2) the weighted kappa statistic (categorical), within population subgroups.ResultsMean (median) SWEMWBS was 23.7 (23.2) for men and 23.2 (23.2) for women (p = 0.100). Spearman correlations were moderately sized for the happiness index (ρ = 0.53, P < 0.001), GHQ-12 (ρ = -0.52, p < 0.001) and EQ-VAS (ρ = 0.40, p < 0.001). Participants consuming <1 portion of fruit and vegetables a day versus ≥5 (odds ratio = 1.43 95% Confidence Interval = (1.22-1.66)) and current smokers versus non-smokers (1.28 (1.15-1.41)) were more likely to have low vs medium wellbeing. Participants who binge drank versus non-drinkers were less likely to have high versus medium wellbeing (0.81 (0.71-0.92)). Spearman correlations between SWEMWBS and WEMWBS were above 0.95; weighted kappa statistics showed almost perfect agreement (0.79-0.85).ConclusionSWEMWBS distinguishes mental wellbeing between subgroups, similarly to WEMWBS, but is less sensitive to gender differences.
| S-EPMC5376387 | biostudies-literature