Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42221536›Full record

ArticleGlobal advances in integrative medicine and health

Assessing the Structural Validity and Measurement Invariance of the Whole Person Health Index.

Kristen Cibelli Hibben, Valerie M Ryan, Ro Nadreau, Catherine Lamoreaux, Sarah E Forrest, Paul J Scanlon, Morgan Earp, Stephen J Blumberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global advances in integrative medicine and health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Kristen Cibelli HibbenDivision of Research and Methodology, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, MD, USA.
Valerie M RyanDivision of Research and Methodology, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, MD, USA.
Ro NadreauDivision of Research and Methodology, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, MD, USA.
Catherine LamoreauxJoint Program in Survey Methodology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3373-4935
Sarah E ForrestDivision of Research and Methodology, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, MD, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3873-9992
Paul J ScanlonDivision of Research and Methodology, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, MD, USA.
Morgan EarpDivision of Research and Methodology, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, MD, USA.
Stephen J BlumbergDivision of Health Interview Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, MD, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2086-4768

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The emergence of "whole person health" presents valuable opportunities for understanding and treating individuals as their complete selves. At the same time, holistic approaches to health introduce measurement challenges, highlighting the need for expansive yet manageable instruments to capture a broader concept of health. The Whole Person Health Index (WPHI) is a nine-item question set that asks respondents to rate their overall general health as well as their quality of life, social and family connections, diet, physical activity, stress, sleep, existential wellbeing, and ability to manage their health. It has been suggested for use in clinical settings and population surveys, and it has shown good promise in an initial evaluation study. Objective: The present study offers an exploratory look at the psychometric properties of the WPHI. Methods: The WPHI items were included on the 11th round of the National Center for Health Statistics Research and Development Survey (RANDS 11), conducted January-March 2025, which used samples of adults from commercially available survey panels. Descriptive and psychometric analyses were applied to explore the factor structure and functioning of the WPHI overall and across different population subgroups. Results: The WPHI demonstrated strong internal consistency and generally favorable measurement properties. Exploratory and confirmatory factor and bifactor analyses with split-half samples provided evidence that responses are largely driven by a dominant general factor, although model fit met some but not all conventional benchmarks for a strict single-factor model. Differential item functioning was detected for self-rated health by age, but not for other items or subgroups. Conclusion: Overall, the WPHI's subjective ratings appear to reflect a common underlying construct, supporting its utility as a broad measure of health and well-being consistent with the whole person health concept. Differences in item interpretation may suggest caution making direct comparisons of index scores across age groups.

Indexed as

health measurementinstrument developmentmeasurement invariancepsychometricswhole person health

Identifiers

PMID42221536
PMCPMC13219821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.