Wellbeing measures for workers: a systematic review and methodological quality appraisal
Rebecca Jarden, Richard J. Siegert, Jane Koziol‐McLain, Helena Bujalka, Margaret Sandham
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: . 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.