Cited by 89Psychometric Methodologies and TestingPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology

The positive mental health instrument: development and validation of a culturally relevant scale in a multi-ethnic Asian population

Open access
Vaingankar, Janhavi, Subramaniam, Mythily, Chong, Siow Ann, Abdin, Edimansyah, Orlando Edelen, Maria, Picco, Louisa, Lim, Yee Wei, Phua, Mei Yen +3 more·2011·Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Instruments to measure mental health and well-being are largely developed and often used within Western populations and this compromises their validity in other cultures. A previous qualitative study in Singapore demonstrated the relevance of spiritual and religious practices to mental health, a dimension currently not included in exiting multi-dimensional measures. The objective of this study was to develop a self-administered measure that covers all key and culturally appropriate domains of mental health, which can be applied to compare levels of mental health across different age, gender and ethnic groups. We present the item reduction and validation of the Positive Mental Health (PMH) instrument in a community-based adult sample in Singapore. METHODS: Surveys were conducted among adult (21-65 years) residents belonging to Chinese, Malay and Indian ethnicities. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA, CFA) were conducted and items were reduced using item response theory tests (IRT). The final version of the PMH instrument was tested for internal consistency and criterion validity. Items were tested for differential item functioning (DIF) to check if items functioned in the same way across all subgroups. RESULTS: EFA and CFA identified six first-order factor structure (General coping, Personal growth and autonomy, Spirituality, Interpersonal skills, Emotional support, and Global affect) under one higher-order dimension of Positive Mental Health (RMSEA=0.05, CFI=0.96, TLI=0.96). A 47-item self-administered multi-dimensional instrument with a six-point Likert response scale was constructed. The slope estimates and strength of the relation to the theta for all items in each six PMH subscales were high (range:1.39 to 5.69), suggesting good discrimination properties. The threshold estimates for the instrument ranged from -3.45 to 1.61 indicating that the instrument covers entire spectrums for the six dimensions. The instrument demonstrated high internal consistency and had significant and expected correlations with other well-being measures. Results confirmed absence of DIF. CONCLUSIONS: The PMH instrument is a reliable and valid instrument that can be used to measure and compare level of mental health across different age, gender and ethnic groups in Singapore.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1477-7525-9-92

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Muthen LK Muthen BO MPLUS User's Guide (6th edition); 1998 201019320621
  2. Cai L du Toit SHC Thissen D IRTPRO: Flexible, multi-dimensional, multiple categorical IRT modeling Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International in press
  3. Kammann R Flett R Affectometer 2: A scale to measure current level of general happiness Aust J Psychol 1983 35 2 259 265 10.1080/00049538308255070 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vaingankar, J., Subramaniam, M., Chong, S. A., Abdin, E., Orlando Edelen, M., Picco, L., Lim, Y. W., Phua, M. Y., Chua, B. Y., Tee, J. Y., & Sherbourne, C.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Mental Health (SG)
  • RAND Corporation (US)
Corresponding author
Vaingankar, Janhavi
Venue
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Published
2011
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
92
ISSN
1477-7525 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2155928802
Cited by
89
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4
FWCI
2.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Singapore Millennium Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Keywords
positive mental health, well-being measurement, coping, social skills, emotional support, differential item functioning, multi-ethnic Asian population, Singapore
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, China, Cultural Characteristics, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, India, Malaysia, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Singapore, Reproducibility of Results, Chi-Square Distribution, Cultural Diversity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review