Reliability of a wellness inventory for use among adolescent females aged 12–14 years
1 School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences and Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Rd, 4059 Brisbane, Australia
2 Civil Engineering and Built Environment School, Science and Engineering Faculty, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
3 School of Public Health and Social Work and Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Queensland, Australia
4 Centre for Functioning and Health Research, Queensland Department of Health, Queensland, Australia
BMC Women's Health 2014, 14:87 doi:10.1186/1472-6874-14-87Published: 21 July 2014
The wellness construct has application in a number of fields including education, healthcare and counseling, particularly with regard to female adolescents. The effective measurement of wellness in adolescents can assist researchers and practitioners in determining lifestyle behaviors in which they are lacking. Behavior change interventions can then be designed which directly aid in the promotion of these areas.
The 5-Factor Wellness Inventory (designed to measure the Indivisible Self model of wellness) is a popular instrument for measuring the broad aspects of wellness amongst adolescents. The instrument comprises 97 items contributing to 17 subscales, five dimension scores, four context scores, total wellness score, and a life satisfaction index. This investigation evaluated the test-retest (intra-rater) reliability of the 5F-Wel instrument in repeated assessments (seven days apart) among adolescent females aged 12–14 years. Percentages of exact agreement for individual items, and the number of respondents who scored within ±5, ±7.5 and ±10 points for total wellness and the five summary dimension scores were calculated.
Overall, 46 (95.8%) participants responded with complete data and were included in the analysis. Item agreement ranged from 47.8% to 100% across the 97 items (median 69.9%, interquartile range 60.9%-73.9%). The percentage of respondents who scored within ±5, ±7.5 and ±10 points for total wellness at the re-assessment was 87.0%, 97.8% and 97.8% respectively. The percentage of respondents who scored within ±5, ±7.5 and ±10 for the domain scores at the reassessment ranged between 54.3-76.1%, 78.3-95.7% and 89.1-95.7% respectively across the five dimensions.
These findings suggest there was considerable variation in agreement between the two assessments on some individual items. However, the total wellness score and the five dimension summary scores remained comparatively stable between assessments.