Cross-cultural validity of the WHO-5 Well-Being Index and Euthymia Scale: A clinimetric analysis

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  • Danilo Carrozzino, Alma Mater Studiorum Bologna University
  • ,
  • Kaj Sparle Christensen
  • Chiara Patierno, Alma Mater Studiorum Bologna University
  • ,
  • Agnieszka Woźniewicz, Department of Family Medicine, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń, Poland.
  • ,
  • Stine Bjerrum Møller, Syddansk Universitet
  • ,
  • Ida-Marie T P Arendt, Syddansk Universitet
  • ,
  • Yuqun Zhang, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Southeast University
  • ,
  • Yonggui Yuan, Southeast University
  • ,
  • Natsu Sasaki, Univ Tokyo, University of Tokyo, IPMU
  • ,
  • Daisuke Nishi, Univ Tokyo, University of Tokyo, IPMU
  • ,
  • Carmen Berrocal Montiel, Pisa Univ, University of Pisa, Dipartimento Med Clin & Sperimentale
  • ,
  • Sara Ceccatelli, Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "Mario Serio," University of Florence, Florence 50139, Italy.
  • ,
  • Giovanni Mansueto, Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "Mario Serio," University of Florence, Florence 50139, Italy., Sigmund Freud University, Milano
  • ,
  • Fiammetta Cosci, University of Florence, Maastricht University

BACKGROUND: The assessment of psychological well-being and euthymia represents an emerging issue in clinical psychology and psychiatry. Rating scales and indices such as the 5-item version of the World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5) and the Euthymia Scale (ES) were developed but insufficient attention has been devoted to the evaluation of their cross-cultural validity. This is the first study using Clinimetric Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (CLIPROM) criteria to assess cross-cultural validity and sensitivity of five different versions of the WHO-5 and ES.

METHODS: A multicenter cross-sectional study involving a total of 3762 adult participants from different European (i.e., Italy, Poland, Denmark) and non-European (i.e., China, Japan) countries was conducted. Item Response Theory models (Mokken and Rasch analyses) were applied.

RESULTS: Mokken coefficients of scalability were found to range from 0.42 to 0.84. The majority of the versions of the WHO-5 fitted the Rasch model expectations. Paired t-tests revealed that the Italian and Danish WHO-5 versions were unidimensional. Person Separation Reliability indices showed that the Polish, Danish, and Japanese ES versions could reliably discriminate between subjects with different levels of euthymia.

LIMITATIONS: A convenience sampling was used, thus limiting the generalizability of study findings. In addition, no measures of negative mental health were administered.

CONCLUSIONS: WHO-5 can be used in international studies for cross-cultural comparisons since it covers transcultural components of subjective well-being. Findings also suggest that the ES can be used as a cross-cultural screening tool since it entailed the clinimetric property of sensitivity.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftJournal of Affective Disorders
Vol/bind311
Sider (fra-til)276-283
ISSN0165-0327
DOI
StatusUdgivet - aug. 2022

Bibliografisk note

Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater

ID: 269599543