Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/33059
Title: Wellbeing measures for workers: a systematic review and methodological quality appraisal
Austin Authors: Jarden, Rebecca J. ;Siegert, Richard J.;Koziol-Mclain, Jane;Bujalka, Helena;Sandham, Margaret H.
Affiliation: Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne School of Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC, Australia
Austin Health
Auckland University of Technology (AUT), North Shore Campus, Auckland, New Zealand
Department of Nursing, Melbourne School of Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC, Australia
Issue Date: 24-May-2023
Publication information: Frontiers in Public Health 2023; 11:1268
Abstract: Introduction: Increasing attention on workplace wellbeing and growth in workplace wellbeing interventions has highlighted the need to measure workers' wellbeing. This systematic review sought to identify the most valid and reliable published measure/s of wellbeing for workers developed between 2010 to 2020. Methods: Electronic databases Health and Psychosocial Instruments, APA PsycInfo, and Scopus were searched. Key search terms included variations of [wellbeing OR “well-being”] AND [employee* OR worker* OR staff OR personnel]. Studies and properties of wellbeing measures were then appraised using Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments. Results: Eighteen articles reported development of new wellbeing instruments and eleven undertook a psychometric validation of an existing wellbeing instrument in a specific country, language, or context. Generation and pilot testing of items for the 18 newly developed instruments were largely rated 'Inadequate'; only two were rated as 'Very Good'. None of the studies reported measurement properties of responsiveness, criterion validity, or content validity. The three instruments with the greatest number of positively rated measurement properties were the Personal Growth and Development Scale, The University of Tokyo Occupational Mental Health well-being 24 scale, and the Employee Well-being scale. However, none of these newly developed worker wellbeing instruments met the criteria for adequate instrument design. Discussion: This review provides researchers and clinicians a synthesis of information to help inform appropriate instrument selection in measurement of workers' wellbeing. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=79044, identifier: PROSPERO, CRD42018079044.
URI: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/33059
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1053179
ORCID: 
Journal: Frontiers in Public Health
Type: Journal Article
Subjects: Wellbeing measures
methodological quality appraisal
systematic review
workers
Appears in Collections:Journal articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
fpubh-11-1053179.pdf921.26 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show full item record

Page view(s)

72
checked on Dec 4, 2024

Download(s)

26
checked on Dec 4, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.