Measuring health worker psychological Well-Being: A validation of the WHO-5 Well-Being Index across ten sub-Saharan African countries

<ns3:p>Background Health worker mental health and psychological well-being is receiving much research attention, particularly since the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. However, in many countries, particularly in low- and middle-income ones, validity evidence on commonly used tools to measure mental health and psychological well-being is direly lacking. Against this background, our study generated evidence on the factorial validity and measurement invariance of the WHO-5 Well-being Index for health workers in ten sub-Saharan African countries. Methods We used secondary data from a total of 9060 health workers across the ten countries; Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) with the standard set of fit indices for factorial validity testing; and multi-group CFA to test for measurement invariance across country, gender, and age groups. Results Results suggest good factorial validity as well as measurement invariance for gender and age group (above and below 40 years). In contrast, we did not find full measurement invariance for country. Conclusions Based on our findings, we conclude that the WHO-5 is well-suited to measure health worker well-being across a diverse range of sub-Saharan African countries, likely generalizing to others. Our findings suggest that scores can be meaningfully compared across genders and age groups, but not across countries. In cross-country research with the WHO-5, we therefore recommend strong caution and ideally context-specific validation work prior to comparing scores across countries.</ns3:p>

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Wellcome Open Research
Published
2026-02-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.25917.1
Primary Topic
Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Measuring health worker psychological Well-Being: A validation of the WHO-5 Well-Being Index across ten sub-Saharan African countries

Julia Lohmann, Lusilda Schutte, Amanda Cromhout, Arianna Tello Fadda
Wellcome Open Research
Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
article

Measuring health worker psychological Well-Being: A validation of the WHO-5 Well-Being Index across ten sub-Saharan African countries

Julia Lohmann, Lusilda Schutte, Amanda Cromhout, Arianna Tello Fadda
article en

Abstract

<ns3:p>Background Health worker mental health and psychological well-being is receiving much research attention, particularly since the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. However, in many countries, particularly in low- and middle-income ones, validity evidence on commonly used tools to measure mental health and psychological well-being is direly lacking. Against this background, our study generated evidence on the factorial validity and measurement invariance of the WHO-5 Well-being Index for health workers in ten sub-Saharan African countries. Methods We used secondary data from a total of 9060 health workers across the ten countries; Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) with the standard set of fit indices for factorial validity testing; and multi-group CFA to test for measurement invariance across country, gender, and age groups. Results Results suggest good factorial validity as well as measurement invariance for gender and age group (above and below 40 years). In contrast, we did not find full measurement invariance for country. Conclusions Based on our findings, we conclude that the WHO-5 is well-suited to measure health worker well-being across a diverse range of sub-Saharan African countries, likely generalizing to others. Our findings suggest that scores can be meaningfully compared across genders and age groups, but not across countries. In cross-country research with the WHO-5, we therefore recommend strong caution and ideally context-specific validation work prior to comparing scores across countries.</ns3:p>

Wellcome Open ResearchVol. 11
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.