IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v23y2014i9-10p1227-1234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards the development of a gender‐sensitive measure of women's mental health

Author

Listed:
  • Yu‐Ming Wang
  • Joy Johnson
  • Bih‐Ching Shu
  • Shih‐Ming Li

Abstract

Aims and objectives To develop a gender‐sensitive measure of women's mental health and to evaluate the measure's psychometric properties. Background Mental health problems are a leading global burden of disease, and gender differences in the prevalence of these problems are well documented. Improving mental health is as important as resolving mental health problems. Although many mental health scales have been developed, few measure women's positive mental health from a gender perspective. Design Instrument development and psychometric evaluation were used. Methods First, a new mental health scale (Women's Mental Health Scale) grounded in women's subjective experiences was formulated from the narratives of four female focus groups (n = 23). The new scale was evaluated using principal component analysis and internal consistency reliability in a sample of female participants (n = 106). Next, the Women's Mental Health Scale, the Chinese version of Beck Depression Inventory‐II and Social Adjustment Scale Self‐Report were used in a survey of female undergraduate students (n = 163) for examining the concurrent criterion‐related validity. Finally, gender differences were examined by assessing the discriminated validity of the Women's Mental Health Scale in a sample of male and female undergraduate students (n = 357). All participants were recruited from communities and universities in middle and south Taiwan. Results A 50‐item Women's Mental Health Scale with four concepts of self, interpersonal, family and social domains was developed. It revealed that the Women's Mental Health Scale had acceptable psychometric properties. There was a significant negative correlation between scores of the Women's Mental Health Scale and the Chinese version of Beck Depression Inventory‐II and a significant positive correlation between scores of the Women's Mental Health Scale and Social Adjustment Scale Self‐Report. There were significant gender differences in the family domain and social domain. Women reported greater mental health in the family domain and social domain than men. Conclusions The Women's Mental Health Scale is a promising gender‐sensitive tool to measure women's mental health. Relevance to clinical practice The Women's Mental Health Scale appears to be a gender‐sensitive measure to assess the positive mental health potentials among women population.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu‐Ming Wang & Joy Johnson & Bih‐Ching Shu & Shih‐Ming Li, 2014. "Towards the development of a gender‐sensitive measure of women's mental health," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(9-10), pages 1227-1234, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:9-10:p:1227-1234
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn12346
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn12346
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn12346?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fledderus, M. & Bohlmeijer, E.T. & Smit, F. & Westerhof, G.J., 2010. "Mental health promotion as a new goal in public mental health care: A randomized controlled trial of an intervention enhancing psychological flexibility," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(12), pages 2372-2378.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrew J. Howell & Holli-Anne Passmore, 2019. "Acceptance and Commitment Training (ACT) as a Positive Psychological Intervention: A Systematic Review and Initial Meta-analysis Regarding ACT’s Role in Well-Being Promotion Among University Students," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 1995-2010, August.
    2. Maame Afua Boatemaa & Kwaku Oppong Asante & Collins Badu Agyemang, 2019. "The Moderating Role of Psychological Flexibility in the Relationship Between Organizational Commitment, Workaholism, Job Security, and Corporate Entrepreneurship Among Information Technology Workers i," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(3), pages 21582440198, August.
    3. Jannis Kraiss & Kleinjan Redelinghuys & Laura. A. Weiss, 2022. "The effects of psychological interventions on well-being measured with the Mental Health Continuum: a meta-analysis," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 3655-3689, October.
    4. Tom Hendriks & Tobi Graafsma & Aabidien Hassankhan & Ernst Bohlmeijer & Joop de Jong, 2018. "Strengths and virtues and the development of resilience: A qualitative study in Suriname during a time of economic crisis," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 64(2), pages 180-188, March.
    5. Rabya Mughal & Valerie DeMarinis & Maria Nordendahl & Hassan Lone & Veronica Phillips & Eolene Boyd-MacMillan, 2023. "Public Mental Health Approaches to Online Radicalisation: An Empty Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(16), pages 1-28, August.
    6. Martha Okafor & Daniel F. Sarpong & Aneeqah Ferguson & David Satcher, 2013. "Improving Health Outcomes of Children through Effective Parenting: Model and Methods," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Susan J. Ferguson & Alan J. Taylor & Catherine McMahon, 2017. "Hope for the Future and Avoidance of the Present: Associations with Well-being in Older Adults," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 1485-1506, October.
    8. Maddison Campbell & Kenneth I. Pakenham, 2022. "Evaluation of a Brief Mindfulness Program for People with Multiple Sclerosis Delivered in the Community Over Five Years," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 1019-1041, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:9-10:p:1227-1234. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.