SynthesisFrontiers in public health2023
Wellbeing measures for workers: a systematic review and methodological quality appraisal.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- A core outcome set for the wellbeing of healthcare professionals: an international Delphi consensus study.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- A scoping review and research agenda: Psychological flexibility and wellbeing in organisations.Applied psychology. Health and well-being · 2026Article
- Cutting Through the Clutter: Cleaning the Lens on Work-Related Wellbeing Concepts.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Factor structure and psychometric validation of the Work and Well-being Inventory.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Neuroscience Needs Behavioral "Wind Tunnels" for Real-Life Translation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Assessment of clinician well-being and the factors that influence it using validated questionnaires: a systematic review.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Organizational wellbeing and associated factors in telecommunication workers in Thailand.Industrial health · 2025Article
- Testing job wellbeing indicators among community behavioral health workers: Community-based participatory research.PloS one · 2025Article
- Perspectives and Practices of Healthcare Leaders in Supporting Healthcare Worker Well-Being: A Reality Check.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2025Article
- Predictors of employee well-being: A global measurements using reflective-formative model.Heliyon · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Increasing attention on workplace wellbeing and growth in workplace wellbeing interventions has highlighted the need to measure workers' wellbeing. This systematic review sought to identify the most valid and reliable published measure/s of wellbeing for workers developed between 2010 to 2020. Methods: Electronic databases Health and Psychosocial Instruments, APA PsycInfo, and Scopus were searched. Key search terms included variations of Results: Eighteen articles reported development of new wellbeing instruments and eleven undertook a psychometric validation of an existing wellbeing instrument in a specific country, language, or context. Generation and pilot testing of items for the 18 newly developed instruments were largely rated 'Inadequate'; only two were rated as 'Very Good'. None of the studies reported measurement properties of responsiveness, criterion validity, or content validity. The three instruments with the greatest number of positively rated measurement properties were the Personal Growth and Development Scale, The University of Tokyo Occupational Mental Health well-being 24 scale, and the Employee Well-being scale. However, none of these newly developed worker wellbeing instruments met the criteria for adequate instrument design. Discussion: This review provides researchers and clinicians a synthesis of information to help inform appropriate instrument selection in measurement of workers' wellbeing. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=79044, identifier: PROSPERO, CRD42018079044.
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.