Methodological study validates the Persian spiritual well-being questionnaire for adolescents, indicating its reliability and validity.
Spiritual well-being (SWB) is a key factor in health, quality of life, and satisfaction. The first step to improving SWB is carefully assessing it using valid and reliable instruments. Nonetheless, no age-appropriate instrument for SWB assessment among adolescents in Iran exists. This study aimed to validate the Persian SWB questionnaire based on the Spiritual Health and Life-Orientation Measure (SHALOM) for adolescents in Iran and evaluate its psychometric properties. This was a methodological study. SHALOM was translated into Persian by two translators and back-translated into English by two other translators. The developers approved the final back-translation of SHALOM of its original version. The face validity of the Persian SWB questionnaire was assessed and confirmed by 100 adolescent students. Then, 129 teenage students completed the scale and construct validity, which was evaluated through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Finally, 48 adolescent students twice completed the scale with a fourteen-day interval, and reliability was assessed by calculating Cronbach’s alpha and test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient. The content validity ratio and index of the Persian SWB questionnaire for adolescents based on SHALOM were more significant than 0.88. Two versions have been generated. The scale had an idea and a lived experiences version. Both versions had four factors: intangible, personal, environmental, and communal. The factor loading values of the items of the ideal and the lived experiences versions of the scale were 0.29–0.87 and 0.28–0.97, respectively. The Cronbach’s alpha values of these versions were 0.87 and 0.9, and their test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.781 and 0.922, respectively (P<0.05). The Persian SWB questionnaire for adolescents has acceptable validity and reliability for SWB assessment among adolescents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Faraji et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: