Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bartlett, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by Coles, E. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bartlett, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by Coles, E. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1998 Faculty of Public Health Medicine of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom

research-article

Psychological health and well-being: why and how should public health specialists measure it? Part 1: rationale and methods of the investigation, and review of psychiatric epidemiology


Christopher J. Bartlett
, Research and Development Specialist
Edward C. Coles
, Head of Department

Welsh Combined Centres for Public Health, University of Wales College of Medicine Abton House, Wedal Road, Cardiff CF4 3QX.
Department of Medical Computing and Statistics, University of Wales College of Medicine Heath Park, Heath, Cardiff CF4 4XN


Address correspondence to Dr C. J. Bartlett, Division of Psychiatry, University of Bristol, 41 St Michael's Hill, Bristol BS2 8DZ

BACKGROUND: There are cogent reasons why public health specialists should take an active interest in and measure the psychological health and well-being of populations. The literature was searched and reviewed with the aim of evaluating survey instruments that would enable public health specialists to measure the psychological health and well-being of populations.

METHODS: The search and review were restricted to instruments that were applicable to adults of working age, and that did not focus on psychotic disorder or organic brain disorder. An attempt was also made to identify instruments that were designed to measure some form of positive well-being and could be applied in population-based surveys. Detailed evaluation was then carried out of two or three instruments that appeared representative of a particular field or approach.

RESULTS: The literature search revealed three major fields of research, ‘Psychiatric Epidemiology’, ‘Stress Studies’ and ‘Subjective Well-being’. Accordingly, the results of the review are presented under these three headings. Results pertaining to commonly used survey instruments in the field of ‘Psychiatric Epidemiology’ are presented. (Those on ‘Stress Studies’ and ‘Subjective Well-being’ are presented in Part 2 of this study).

CONCLUSIONS: Although some questionnaires in the field of ‘Psychiatric Epidemiology’, such as the General Health Questionnaire and the HAD Scale, offer a valid and convenient means of measuring degrees of neurotic disorder in a population, they do not measure any form of positive well-being. In Part 2, methods of measurement from the other two fields are reviewed and overall conclusions are drawn about the options available to public health specialists.

Keywords: psychiatric epidemiology, positive health, population health, survey instruments


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.