ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
A new lens on wellbeing: psychometric evaluation of the Wellbeing scale in India.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Wellbeing is widely viewed as a multi-dimensional construct, encompassing factors like hedonia, eudaimonia, financial contentment, physical health, and social connectedness. The Wellbeing Scale integrates these dimensions into a unified framework for measuring wellbeing. While wellbeing research is growing in India, there is limited validation of the scales used. This study aimed to validate the English and Hindi versions of the Wellbeing Scale in the Indian context. Methods: A convenience sample of 1795 adults (M age = 26.08 years) participated, with 986 completing the survey in English and 809 in Hindi. CFA was conducted for both language versions, and measurement invariance across language and socio-demographic variables was tested. Additionally, MANOVA examined the influence of socio-demographic factors on wellbeing domains. Results: CFA results indicated that the bifactor model confirmed the best fit for both language versions, while the higher-order factor structure demonstrated better measurement quality, reliability, and validity. Positive correlations were found between all factors and life satisfaction and positive feelings. Hedonic wellbeing was negatively associated with negative experiences. Measurement invariance testing supported the higher-order factor structure across languages and demographic variables. Wellbeing scores were significantly influenced by education, family income, and residence type. Discussion: Both the Hindi and English versions of the Wellbeing Scale are validated for use in the Indian context and are suitable for comparing wellbeing across demographic groups.
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.