ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020
Development and Validation of a Comprehensive Well-Being Scale for People in the University Environment (Pitt Wellness Scale) Using a Crowdsourcing Approach: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Wellbeing measures for workers: a systematic review and methodological quality appraisal.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- Super Mario Bros. and Yoshi Games' Affordance of Childlike Wonder and Reduced Burnout Risk in Young Adults: In-Depth Mixed Methods Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR serious games · 2025Article
- Nutrition and Physical Activity in the University Population: A Scoping Review of Combined Impacts on Psychological Well-Being, Cognitive Performance, and Quality of Life.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Review
- Comparison of SPEED and OSDI questionnaires for dry eye symptom in Chinese college students: a cross-sectional study.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- The Seity Check-In: A novel tool for assessing momentary well-being.PLOS mental health · 2025Article
- A scoping review of well-being measures: conceptualisation and scales for overall well-being.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Article
- Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Mainland Chinese version of the manchester orofacial pain disability scale (MOPDS) among college students.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Impact of a Digital Intervention for Literacy in Depression among Portuguese University Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Revision of the Pitt Wellness Scale for People in the University Environment.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWell-being has multiple domains, and these domains are unique to the population being examined. Therefore, to precisely assess the well-being of a population, a scale specifically designed for that population is needed.
objectiveThe goal of this study was to design and validate a comprehensive well-being scale for people in a university environment, including students, faculty, and staff.
methodsA crowdsourcing approach was used to determine relevant domains for the comprehensive well-being scale in this population and identify specific questions to include in each domain. A web-based questionnaire (Q1) was used to collect opinions from a group of university students, faculty, and staff about the domains and subdomains of the scale. A draft of a new well-being scale (Q2) was created in response to the information collected via Q1, and a second group of study participants was invited to evaluate the relevance and clarity of each statement. A newly created well-being scale (Q3) was then used by a third group of university students, faculty, and staff. A psychometric analysis was performed on the data collected via Q3 to determine the validity and reliability of the well-being scale.
resultsIn the first step, a group of 518 university community members (students, faculty, and staff) indicated the domains and subdomains that they desired to have in a comprehensive well-being scale. In the second step, a second group of 167 students, faculty, and staff evaluated the relevance and clarity of the proposed statements in each domain. In the third step, a third group of 546 students, faculty, and staff provided their responses to the new well-being scale (Pitt Wellness Scale). The psychometric analysis indicated that the reliability of the well-being scale was high.
conclusionsUsing a crowdsourcing approach, we successfully created a comprehensive and highly reliable well-being scale for people in the university environment. Our new Pitt Wellness Scale may be used to measure the well-being of people in the university environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.