- LifeConScale adapted for university staff in Spain and Colombia using an expert Delphi method and tested on 440 professionals.
- Seven interpretable factors emerged: personal wellbeing, anxiety, physical activity, snacking, leisure screen use, social media use, fruit and vegetable intake.
- Psychometric results showed strong reliability (omega 0.753-0.929), discriminant validity, and measurement invariance tested across Spain and Colombia.
Front Public Health. 2026 Oct 20;14:1945598. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2026.1945598. eCollection 2026.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Health promotion within the university setting requires valid and reliable instruments to identify factors related to lifestyle, emotional well-being and mental health among staff. Although the Life Conditions Scale (LifeConScale) had previously been validated in adolescents, there were no instruments specifically integrating these dimensions for university personnel. Therefore, adaptation and validation for use with higher education professionals is necessary.
OBJECTIVE: To adapt the LifeConScale and examine its psychometric properties in university staff, including Teaching and Research Staff and Technical, Management, Administrative and Services Staff.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 440 professionals from two universities in Spain and Colombia. The instrument was adapted via a Delphi process with health and health-promotion experts. Common-factor exploratory factor analysis with parallel analysis and oblique rotation assessed internal structure; Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin and Bartlett’s test evaluated sampling adequacy. Reliability was estimated with McDonald’s omega. Measurement invariance for core dimensions (personal wellbeing, anxiety, physical activity) between countries was examined through nested multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (configural, metric and scalar).
RESULTS: Sampling adequacy was adequate (KMO = 0.850; p < 0.001). Parallel analysis and common-factor exploratory factor analysis with oblique rotation identified seven interpretable factors: personal wellbeing, anxiety, physical activity, snacking, leisure screen use, social media use, and fruit and vegetable intake. The Personal Wellbeing Index and GAD-7 showed no cross-loadings and a moderate latent correlation, supporting discriminant validity; the AUDIT-C was retained as an independent validated scale scored with its original algorithm. Reliability (McDonald’s omega) was excellent for anxiety (ω = 0.929), wellbeing (ω = 0.922) and social media (ω = 0.920), and good for physical activity (ω = 0.859), leisure screens (ω = 0.795), fruit and vegetables (ω = 0.760) and snacking (ω = 0.753). Heterogeneous dietary and sleep indicators were treated as formative and not aggregated into summative scores.
PMID:42978779 | PMC:PMC13727601 | DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1945598
Share Evidence Blueprint
Save to Google Notes
Search Google Scholar
Save as PDF
⭐ My Revision List
