Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35204948›Full record

ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Measuring Happiness in Adolescent Samples: A Systematic Review.

Justė Lukoševičiūtė, Gita Argustaitė-Zailskienė, Kastytis Šmigelskas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Justė LukoševičiūtėDepartment of Health Psychology, Faculty of Public Health, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Tilžės g. 18, LT-47181 Kaunas, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0003-2041-9493
Gita Argustaitė-ZailskienėDepartment of Health Psychology, Faculty of Public Health, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Tilžės g. 18, LT-47181 Kaunas, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0002-8983-0574
Kastytis ŠmigelskasDepartment of Health Psychology, Faculty of Public Health, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Tilžės g. 18, LT-47181 Kaunas, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0001-5371-9500

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHappiness is a phenomenon that relates to better mental and physical health and even longevity. There has been an increase in surveys assessing subjective well-being as well as happiness, one of the well-being components that reflect one's feelings or moods. Happiness is mostly measured in adult samples. There is a lack of an overview of the tools used to evaluate adolescent happiness, so this paper aimed to review them.

methodsA literature search was performed in the PubMed and PsycArticles databases (2010-2019). In total, 133 papers met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review.

resultsThe results are grouped according to the type of measure, single or multiple items, that was used in a study. Almost half of the studies (64 of 133) evaluated subjective happiness using single-item measures. The most commonly used scales were the 4-item Subjective Happiness Scale and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire. Among the 133 articles analyzed, 18 reported some validation procedures related to happiness. However, in the majority of cases (14 studies), happiness was not the central phenomenon of validation, which suggests a lack of happiness validation studies.

conclusionsFinally, recommendations for future research and for the choice of happiness assessment tools are presented.

Indexed as

adolescenthappiness measurementmental healthsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35204948
PMCPMC8870059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.