Is the meaning of subjective well-being similar in Latin American countries? A cross-cultural measurement invariance study of the WHO-5 well-being index during the COVID-19 pandemic.
COVID-19
Cross-cultural
Invariance
WHO well-being index
Well-being
Journal
BMC psychology
ISSN: 2050-7283
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101627676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Apr 2023
06 Apr 2023
Historique:
received:
07
01
2023
accepted:
28
03
2023
medline:
10
4
2023
entrez:
6
4
2023
pubmed:
7
4
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is an urgent need to assess changes in well-being on a multinational scale during the COVID-19 pandemic, thus culturally valid scales must be available. With this in mind, this study examined the invariance of the WHO well-being index (WHO-5) among a sample of 5183 people from 12 Latin Americans countries (Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay). The results of the present study indicate that the WHO-5 is strictly invariant across samples from different Latin American countries. Furthermore, the results of the IRT analysis indicate that all items of the WHO-5 were highly discriminative and that the difficulty required to respond to each of the five items is ascending. Additionally, the results indicated the presence of moderate and small size differences in subjective well-being among most countries. The WHO-5 is useful for assessing subjective well-being in 12 Latin American countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, since the differences between scores can be attributed to differences in well-being and not in other characteristics of the scale.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There is an urgent need to assess changes in well-being on a multinational scale during the COVID-19 pandemic, thus culturally valid scales must be available.
METHODS
METHODS
With this in mind, this study examined the invariance of the WHO well-being index (WHO-5) among a sample of 5183 people from 12 Latin Americans countries (Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay).
RESULTS
RESULTS
The results of the present study indicate that the WHO-5 is strictly invariant across samples from different Latin American countries. Furthermore, the results of the IRT analysis indicate that all items of the WHO-5 were highly discriminative and that the difficulty required to respond to each of the five items is ascending. Additionally, the results indicated the presence of moderate and small size differences in subjective well-being among most countries.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The WHO-5 is useful for assessing subjective well-being in 12 Latin American countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, since the differences between scores can be attributed to differences in well-being and not in other characteristics of the scale.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37024964
doi: 10.1186/s40359-023-01149-8
pii: 10.1186/s40359-023-01149-8
pmc: PMC10078082
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
102Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
World Psychiatry. 2014 Jun;13(2):118-24
pubmed: 24890055
Trends Psychiatry Psychother. 2018;40(2):79-84
pubmed: 29995154
Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Apr;2(4):253-260
pubmed: 30936533
Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2018 Oct 10;42:e165
pubmed: 31093193
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Mar 26;8:578959
pubmed: 33842492
Acta Neuropsychiatr. 2021 Jun;33(3):156-159
pubmed: 33427155
Curr Psychol. 2022 Jan 19;:1-18
pubmed: 35068911
J Med Internet Res. 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34
pubmed: 15471760
J Clin Psychol. 2018 Jun;74(6):1034-1052
pubmed: 29380877
Psychiatry Res. 2020 Jul;289:113053
pubmed: 32388173
BMC Psychol. 2015 Jun 18;3(1):18
pubmed: 26090106
J Sci Med Sport. 2021 Apr;24(4):320-326
pubmed: 33341382
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008 Nov;95(5):1005-18
pubmed: 18954190
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2001;251 Suppl 2:II27-31
pubmed: 11824831
Lancet. 2020 Nov 7;396(10261):1463
pubmed: 33160550
Med Care. 2006 Nov;44(11 Suppl 3):S69-77
pubmed: 17060838
JAMA. 1994 Aug 24-31;272(8):619-26
pubmed: 7726894
J Affect Disord. 2018 Jan 1;225:503-522
pubmed: 28866295
Glob Ment Health (Camb). 2021 Jul 19;8:e26
pubmed: 34367649
Psychother Psychosom. 2015;84(3):167-76
pubmed: 25831962
Psychother Psychosom. 1996;65(4):183-90
pubmed: 8843498
Front Psychol. 2018 Mar 22;9:332
pubmed: 29623053
Front Psychol. 2020 Jan 28;11:29
pubmed: 32047462
Aten Primaria. 2019 Nov;51(9):586-589
pubmed: 31060751
Global Health. 2021 Apr 6;17(1):39
pubmed: 33823897
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018 Sep 6;16(1):175
pubmed: 30189867
Transl Behav Med. 2020 Oct 12;10(5):1098-1109
pubmed: 33044541
Community Ment Health J. 2014 Nov;50(8):987-90
pubmed: 24664367
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021 Jan 15;21(1):59
pubmed: 33451292
Lancet Psychiatry. 2020 Jun;7(6):547-560
pubmed: 32304649
Acta Neuropsychiatr. 2020 Oct;32(5):277-279
pubmed: 32624036
Br J Psychiatry. 2021 Jun;218(6):326-333
pubmed: 33081860
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 16;15(4):e0231924
pubmed: 32298385
Med Humanit. 2020 Sep;46(3):333-339
pubmed: 31471446
Br J Psychiatry. 2020 Oct;217(4):540-542
pubmed: 32493516
Front Psychol. 2016 Jan 05;6:1943
pubmed: 26779071
J Affect Disord. 2018 Mar 1;228:153-159
pubmed: 29248821
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020 Sep 11;18(1):305
pubmed: 32912245