Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne School of Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC, Australia.
Austin Health, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia.
Front Public Health. 2023 May 24;11:1053179. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1053179. eCollection 2023.
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.
Electronic databases Health and Psychosocial Instruments, APA PsycInfo, and Scopus were searched. Key search terms included variations of AND . Studies and properties of wellbeing measures were then appraised using Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments.
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.
This review provides researchers and clinicians a synthesis of information to help inform appropriate instrument selection in measurement of workers' wellbeing.
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=79044, identifier: PROSPERO, CRD42018079044.
随着人们对工作场所幸福感的关注不断增加,以及工作场所幸福感干预措施的不断增加,人们越来越需要衡量员工的幸福感。本系统评价旨在确定 2010 年至 2020 年间开发的、针对工作者的最有效和可靠的幸福感测量工具。
电子数据库 Health and Psychosocial Instruments、APA PsycInfo 和 Scopus 进行了检索。主要检索词包括“工作者幸福感”和“测量工具”的变体。然后,使用基于共识的健康测量仪器选择标准评估幸福感测量工具的研究和属性。
18 篇文章报告了新的幸福感工具的开发,11 篇文章在特定国家、语言或背景下对现有幸福感工具进行了心理测量验证。18 个新开发的工具中,项目的生成和试点测试大多被评为“不充分”;只有两个被评为“非常好”。没有一项研究报告了反应性、效标效度或内容效度的测量特性。在具有最多正面评价测量特性的三个工具中,个人成长和发展量表、东京大学职业心理健康 24 量表和员工幸福感量表。然而,这些新开发的工作者幸福感工具均未达到充分仪器设计的标准。
本评价为研究人员和临床医生提供了综合信息,以帮助他们在测量工作者幸福感时选择适当的工具。
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=79044,标识符:PROSPERO,CRD42018079044。