ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
Assessing evidence of measurement invariance of the Mental Health Inventory (MHI-5) by gender in a German adult sample.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Gambling Severity and the Use of General Health Care and Social Services: A Nationwide Population Survey of Service Use and Associated Factors.European addiction research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Mental Health Inventory-5 (MHI-5) is an internationally used screening measure for assessing mental health, with evidence supporting validity and reliability in different settings. So far, measurement invariance of the MHI-5, especially regarding gender, has rarely been investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine measurement invariance of the MHI-5 between men and women in a German population sample to enable valid and generalizable group comparisons.
methodsA total of 2075 participants (52.5% women) aged 18–64 years (M = 32.7, SD = 11.7) were proactively recruited at a municipal registry office in Germany and completed the MHI-5. The underlying factor structure was examined by comparing a one-factor model to a two-factor model. Multiple group confirmatory factor analysis was used to investigate measurement invariance between men and women.
resultsA two-factor structure showed better model fit (χ2(4) = 106.388, Comparative Fit Index, CFI = 0.986) compared to a one-factor structure (χ2(5) = 193.652, CFI = 0.974). Constraining thresholds to equality did not lead to a significant loss of fit (χ2(10) = 9.370; p = .497, ΔCFI = .005). Further constraining loadings also did not reduce model fit (Δχ2(3) = 2.036; p = .565, ΔCFI = .001).
conclusionThe results demonstrated threshold and loading invariance for the MHI-5 between men and women. These findings suggest that the MHI-5 can be used for meaningful comparisons of latent means between men and women in the German population.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (trial registration number: DRKS00014274, date of registration: 12 March 2018).
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.