ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026
Development and Initial Validation of the Multidimensional Psychosocial Work Environment Scale for Employed Persons (MPWES).
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundPsychosocial well-being at work is a multidimensional construct associated with employee health, organizational functioning, sustainable workforce development, and population mental health. However, few theoretically integrated instruments simultaneously assess work-related resources, job demands, psychosocial risks, and employee subjective well-being. This study aimed to develop and conduct the initial validation of the Multidimensional Psychosocial Work Environment Scale for Employed Persons (MPWES), grounded in the OECD well-being framework, the WHO-5 conceptual approach, and the Job Demands-Resources model.
methodsScale development involved theory-driven identification of psychosocial dimensions, item generation, content and face validity assessment, and stepwise psychometric evaluation. Content validity was assessed using the Content Validity Index, and face validity using the Face Validity Index. The hypothesized structure was examined using confirmatory factor analysis. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega, while convergent and discriminant validity were assessed using Average Variance Extracted, Composite Reliability, and inter-factor correlations.
resultsThe proposed measurement model comprised ten dimensions: Subjective Well-Being, Inclusion, Social Support, Workplace Harassment, Work Intensity, Work-related Psychosomatic Strain, Professional Development, Health Risks, Financial Safety, and Autonomy. CFA results provided preliminary and partial support for the proposed ten-factor structure, with borderline-to-acceptable absolute fit indices but limited-to-moderate incremental fit indices. Most dimensions demonstrated acceptable internal consistency; however, convergent and discriminant validity findings should be interpreted cautiously, particularly for dimensions with few items, Financial Safety, and the high correlation between Inclusion and Social Support.
conclusionsThe findings provide preliminary empirical support for the MPWES as an initial integrated assessment framework. Further longitudinal, cross-cultural, and independent validation is required.
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.