Validation of Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) in Pakistani healthcare professionals

, , , , , , , , , ,
1 CMH Lahore Medical College and Institute of Dentistry, Lahore, Pakistan
2 Statistics and Epidemiology Unit, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick Medical School, Coventry, United Kingdom
DOI
10.7287/peerj.preprints.1084v1
Published
Accepted
Subject Areas
Epidemiology, Global Health, Psychiatry and Psychology, Public Health
Keywords
burnout, WEMWBS, Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale, mental fatigue, Health personnel, Mental health
Copyright
© 2015 Waqas et al.
Licence
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ PrePrints) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
Cite this article
Waqas A, Ahmad W, Taggart F, Muhammad Z, Bukhari MHH, Sami SA, Batool SM, Najeeb F, Hanif A, Rizvi ZA, Ejaz S. 2015. Validation of Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) in Pakistani healthcare professionals. PeerJ PrePrints 3:e1084v1

Abstract

Background: This study was carried out to evaluate the psychometric properties of Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale in Pakistani healthcare professionals. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was carried out from June, 2013 to December, 2014 among 1271 Pakistani health personnel (HCPs) belonging to seven different cities of Punjab province, Pakistan, to study the construct and reliability of Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale in Pakistani population. All data were analyzed in SPSS v.21. Results: Our analysis demonstrated a unidimensional construct, a high internal consistency (0.89), good convergent validity and easy readability of WEMWBS among Pakistani HCPs. Conclusion: WEMWBS is both reliable and valid for use in Pakistani population.

Author Comment

This is a submission to PeerJ for review.

Supplemental Information