Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36803574›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2023

Rasch validation of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS) in community-dwelling adults.

Wei Deng, Sydney Carpentier, Jena Blackwood, Ann Van de Winckel

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. What Are the Important Health and Well-Being Outcome Dimensions for Parent Carers of Disabled Children? A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Wei DengDivision of Rehabilitation Science, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Sydney CarpentierDivision of Rehabilitation Science, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Jena BlackwoodDivision of Rehabilitation Science, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Ann Van de WinckelDivision of Physical Therapy, Division of Rehabilitation Science, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Medical School, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware St SE (MMC 388), Rm 311, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA. avandewi@umn.edu.

Funding

University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR002494 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R, WEISDORF, DANIEL J · 2018 to 2022
$34.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002494NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR002494
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic and the recent political divide in the United States (US), there is an urgent need to address the soaring mental well-being problems and promote positive well-being. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS) measures the positive aspects of mental health. Previous studies confirmed its construct validity, reliability, and unidimensionality with confirmatory factor analysis. Six studies have performed a Rasch analysis on the WEMWBS, and only one evaluated young adults in the US. The goal of our study is to use Rasch analysis to validate the WEMBS in a wider age group of community-dwelling adults in the US.

methodsWe used the Rasch unidimensional measurement model 2030 software to evaluate item and person fit, targeting, person separation reliability (PSR), and differential item functioning (DIF) for sample sizes of at least 200 persons in each subgroup.

resultsAfter deleting two items, the WEMBS analyzed in our 553 community-dwelling adults (average age 51.22 ± 17.18 years; 358 women) showed an excellent PSR = 0.91 as well as person and item fit, but the items are too easy for this population (person mean location = 2.17 ± 2.00). There was no DIF for sex, mental health, or practicing breathing exercises.

conclusionsThe WEMWBS had good item and person fit but the targeting is off when used in community-dwelling adults in the US. Adding more difficult items might improve the targeting and capture a broader range of positive mental well-being.

Indexed as

COVID-19Independent LivingAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPandemicsPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultCommunityHealthy volunteersMental well-beingRaschValidation studies

Identifiers

PMID36803574
PMCPMC9936469

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.