The Psychometric Challenges of Implementing Wellbeing Assessment Into Clinical Research and Practice: A Commentary on "Assessing Mental Wellbeing Using the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Modeling"

Comments on an article by M. Iasiello et al. (see record 2022-44066-001). Iasiello et al. offered a useful meta-analytic summary of the construct validity evidence for the internal structure of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form (MHC-SF), with the aim of encouraging the assessment of “wellbeing in clinical practice to demonstrate clinically relevant outcomes that may contribute to clinical recovery or relapse prevention”. As Iasiello et al. noted, clinical assessment and treatment effectiveness have focused on “dysfunction and distress” and the use of the MHC-SF can help reorient practitioners toward addressing symptom reduction and improved wellbeing. Iasiello et al. also drew attention to the ongoing debate about the dimensionality of the MHCSF. They also joined a recent chorus of voices that have raised concern about the widespread proliferation of measures, often tied to researcher specific theoretical models, rather than “validating and improving existing measures. Furthermore, research is needed on the utility of the MHC-SF with clinical samples, since it does seem that clinical samples may differ from the general population in their interpretation of the items. As Iasiello et al. pointed out, some dimensions of wellbeing may be difficult for clients “to differentiate ... when feeling severely distressed”. Research is therefore needed on client wellbeing across multiple time points to see whether clients might perceive more nuanced distinctions among MHC-SF wellbeing dimensions over the course of treatment. It may in fact be that clients perceive greater distinctions in wellbeing as their symptoms improve. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)