ArticleTrends in psychology2022
Spanish Version of the Revised Mental Health Inventory-5 (R-MHI-5): New Psychometric Evidence from the Classical Test Theory (CTT) and the Item Response Theory Perspective (IRT).
Article in Trends in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing evidence of measurement invariance of the Mental Health Inventory (MHI-5) by gender in a German adult sample.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- New psychometric evidence from the Revised Mental Health Inventory (R-MHI-5) in Peruvian adolescents from a network psychometrics approach.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- What Affects the Quality of Score Transformations? Potential Issues in True-Score Equating Using the Partial Credit Model.Educational and psychological measurement · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study's objective was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the revised version of the MHI-5, for which a sample of 1002 university students of both sexes (41.4% men and 58.6% women) between the ages of 17 to 35 years (M = 21.4; SD = 3.4) was collected. Along with the R-MHI-5, other instruments were applied to measure anxiety and depression. Regarding the results, it was evidenced that the model with two related factors presents better fit indices (CFI = .99; TLI = .99; RMSEA = .071) compared to a one-dimensional model (CFI = .74; TLI = .48; RMSEA = .422). Also, it was found that the factorial structure of the MHI-5 did not show evidence of being strictly invariant for the group of men and women. However, it did show evidence of partial invariance for the group of adolescents and adults. Furthermore, the latent relationships model showed that psychological well-being is negatively related to anxiety (- .25) and depression (- .37), and psychological distress is positively related to anxiety (.85) and depression (.87). From the IRT perspective, all items present adequate discrimination indices, with item 4 being the most accurate item to assess psychological well-being. Regarding psychological distress, items 3 and 5 are the most accurate to assess this dimension. It is concluded that the scale that the R-MHI-5 is an instrument with robust psychometric evidence from the perspective of CTT and IRT.
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.