Best practice indicators in workplace mental health promotion: development and expert validation.

Carlos Montes, Artur Hernández, Carlos Dopico-Casal

Abstract readValidation Study

In one paragraph

Article in Health promotion international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Carlos MontesDepartment of Social Psychology, Basic Psychology, and Methodology, University of Santiago de Compostela, Xosé María Suárez Núñez Street s/n, Campus Vida, 15782 Santiago de Compostela (A Coruña), Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6270-7306

Artur HernándezDepartment of Social Psychology, Basic Psychology, and Methodology, University of Santiago de Compostela, Xosé María Suárez Núñez Street s/n, Campus Vida, 15782 Santiago de Compostela (A Coruña), Spain.ORCID 0009-0007-7711-3678

Carlos Dopico-CasalDepartment of Social Psychology, Basic Psychology, and Methodology, University of Santiago de Compostela, Xosé María Suárez Núñez Street s/n, Campus Vida, 15782 Santiago de Compostela (A Coruña), Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2947-0068

Funding

Collaboration Scholarship from the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, SpainGalician Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most of our waking hours are spent in the workplace, where mental health significantly impacts workers' quality of life and overall well-being. Mental health can have both positive and negative consequences not only on the working population but also on organizations and society as a whole. In this context, best practices in Workplace Mental Health Promotion (WMHP) are essential for guiding initiatives aimed at fostering mental health in occupational settings. The main objective of this study was to develop and validate best-practice indicators for WMHP. For this purpose, a qualitative empirical design was employed. Drawing on a review of the WMHP literature, a list of potential indicators was generated and subsequently submitted to an expert panel for evaluation. The reliability of the expert judgments was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Content validity was evaluated through the content validity ratio (CVR) and the modified kappa statistic (K*). As a result, 27 validated, evidence-based indicators were obtained, which showed consistency with findings from previous research. These results have important theoretical and practical implications and can inform future research as well as guide practitioners and organizations in the implementation of WMHP practices.

Indexed as

Health PromotionMental HealthOccupational HealthWorkplaceHumansQualitative ResearchReproducibility of Resultsbest practicescontent validityexpert ratingsmental health promotionworkplace

Identifiers

PMID40971790

DOI10.1093/heapro/daaf147

PMCPMC12448472

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.