ArticleJMIR mental health2020
Assessment of Population Well-Being With the Mental Health Quotient (MHQ): Development and Usability Study.
Article in JMIR mental health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- FIGO best practice recommendations for the mental health of women at menopausal age.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Guideline
- Association between a multi-component web-based mental health intervention and clinical outcomes in patients with psychological disorders: a historical controlled study.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Contribution of social determinants to symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Global Mind Project data in the United States: A comparison with national statistics.International journal of population data science · 2026Article
- Development and preliminary validation of mental health check-up questionnaire in Korea.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Investigating health literacy and sociodemographic factors in college students.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Independent and Joint Associations of Physical Activity and Sleep on Mental Health Among a Global Sample of 200,743 Adults.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2025Article
- The declining mental health of the young and the global disappearance of the unhappiness hump shape in age.PloS one · 2025Article
- Estimation of the nature and magnitude of mental distress in the population associated with ultra-processed food consumption.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- MHQ: constructing an aggregate metric of population mental wellbeing.Population health metrics · 2024Article
- Article
- Childhood socioeconomic position and cardiometabolic risk in young adulthood- the impact of mental health.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Measuring general mental health in early-mid adolescence: A systematic meta-review of content and psychometrics.JCPP advances · 2023Article
- Using participatory action research to reimagine community mental health services in Colombia: a mixed-method study protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Assessment of Population Well-being With the Mental Health Quotient: Validation Study.JMIR mental health · 2022Article
- Poor Separation of Clinical Symptom Profiles by DSM-5 Disorder Criteria.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Sustained, Multifaceted Improvements in Mental Well-Being Following Psychedelic Experiences in a Prospective Opportunity Sample.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Psychological Screening and Tracking of Athletes and Digital Mental Health Solutions in a Hybrid Model of Care: Mini Review.JMIR formative research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExisting mental health assessment tools provide an incomplete picture of symptom experience and create ambiguity, bias, and inconsistency in mental health outcomes. Furthermore, by focusing on disorders and dysfunction, they do not allow a view of mental health and well-being across a general population.
objectiveThis study aims to demonstrate the outcomes and validity of a new web-based assessment tool called the Mental Health Quotient (MHQ), which is designed for the general population. The MHQ covers the complete breadth of clinical mental health symptoms and also captures healthy mental functioning to provide a complete profile of an individual's mental health from clinical to thriving.
methodsThe MHQ was developed based on the coding of symptoms assessed in 126 existing Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-based psychiatric assessment tools as well as neuroscientific criteria laid out by Research Domain Criteria to arrive at a comprehensive set of semantically distinct mental health symptoms and attributes. These were formulated into questions on a 9-point scale with both positive and negative dimensions and developed into a web-based tool that takes approximately 14 min to complete. As its output, the assessment provides overall MHQ scores as well as subscores for 6 categories of mental health that distinguish clinical and at-risk groups from healthy populations based on a nonlinear scoring algorithm. MHQ items were also mapped to the DSM fifth edition (DSM-5), and clinical diagnostic criteria for 10 disorders were applied to the MHQ outcomes to cross-validate scores labeled at-risk and clinical. Initial data were collected from 1665 adult respondents to test the tool.
resultsScores in the normal healthy range spanned from 0 to 200 for the overall MHQ, with an average score of approximately 100 (SD 45), and from 0 to 100 with average scores between 48 (SD 21) and 55 (SD 22) for subscores in each of the 6 mental health subcategories. Overall, 2.46% (41/1665) and 13.09% (218/1665) of respondents were classified as clinical and at-risk, respectively, with negative scores. Validation against DSM-5 diagnostic criteria showed that 95% (39/41) of those designated clinical were positive for at least one DSM-5-based disorder, whereas only 1.14% (16/1406) of those with a positive MHQ score met the diagnostic criteria for a mental health disorder.
conclusionsThe MHQ provides a fast, easy, and comprehensive way to assess population mental health and well-being; identify at-risk individuals and subgroups; and provide diagnosis-relevant information across 10 disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.