How it works
Clinical Methodology
Last updated 8 July 2026
Our approach
The assessment is built on two ideas. First, use validated instruments — questionnaires that researchers have tested for reliability and validity — rather than ad-hoc questions. Second, take a salutogenic view: alongside screening for difficulty (depression, anxiety, hazardous drinking) we also measure protective capacities (resilience, sense of coherence, self-efficacy, social connection), because well-being is more than the absence of symptoms.
The 11 areas and their instruments
Your full report covers these areas. Each maps to a specific published instrument:
How your answers become scores
Every answer is turned into a score using the original, published scoring rules of the instrument it belongs to — the same approach a clinician or researcher would apply. We add no scoring of our own invention: each area is calculated exactly as its authors designed and validated it.
Individual answers are combined into a score for each area, and those areas together form your overall picture — so every result stays directly comparable to the published norms and cut-offs for that instrument.
How to read your bands
Each result falls into a colour-coded band. On the 1–5 scales a lower score is calmer; the clinical screeners use their own validated cut-offs.
🟢 Low / Good (1.0–2.4 on 1–5 scales) — favourable; maintain and reinforce.
🟡 Moderate (2.5–3.4) — a warning zone where preventive action is advisable.
🔴 High (3.5–5.0) — a significant issue; action is recommended, with support if needed.
PHQ-9: 0–4 None · 5–9 Mild · 10–14 Moderate · 15–19 Mod-Severe · 20–27 Severe
GAD-7: 0–4 Minimal · 5–9 Mild · 10–14 Moderate · 15–21 Severe
WHO-5: 0–28 possible depression screen · 29–49 low well-being · 50–100 good
SOC-13: 13–44 Weak · 45–59 Moderate · 60–91 Strong
AUDIT-C: ≤2 Low · 3–4 Moderate · ≥5 High risk
From results to next steps
The report matches your areas of concern to first-line, evidence-based interventions recognised by EU and international guidelines. It suggests directions to explore with a professional — it does not prescribe treatment.
- CBT (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy). First-line treatment for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders (NICE, 2022). Available in-person or digitally.
- ACT (Acceptance & Commitment Therapy). Highly effective for burnout, chronic stress, and low sense of meaning. Builds psychological flexibility.
- MBSR (Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction). Kabat-Zinn's 8-week programme. Robust evidence for stress, anxiety, and pain. Widely available in Europe.
- CBT-I (CBT for Insomnia). Gold-standard for sleep disorders — more effective long-term than sleep medication (ESRS guidelines).
- Physical Activity. 150 min/week moderate exercise = significant reduction in depression and anxiety (EU Physical Activity Guidelines, 2021).
- Social Prescribing. Connecting to community, volunteering, or groups is as effective as medication for mild depression.
- Brief Alcohol Intervention. 5–10 minutes of structured advice from a GP reduces hazardous drinking by 20–30% (WHO AUDIT manual).
- Financial Counselling. Debt counselling services available in all EU states. Practical financial relief directly reduces psychological distress.
- Self-Efficacy Building. Mastery experiences, vicarious learning, and verbal encouragement rebuild self-efficacy (Bandura). A therapist can guide this.
What this assessment is not
These instruments are powerful, but they have real limits — being honest about them is part of using them responsibly.
- Screening, not diagnosis. A positive screen flags that a fuller assessment may help; only a qualified professional can diagnose.
- Self-report. Results reflect how you answered on the day and can be affected by mood, fatigue, and interpretation.
- General, not personalised to your history. The tool does not know your medical history, medication, or circumstances, which a clinician would weigh.
- Not a monitored service. The assessment cannot respond in a crisis.
Sources
Instruments are used in line with their authors' published, public-domain or free-use terms. Key references include: PHQ-9 (Kroenke & Spitzer, 2001); GAD-7 (Spitzer et al., 2006); WHO-5 (WHO, 1998); COPSOQ III and the HSE Management Standards; Brief COPE (Carver, 1997); Brief Resilience Scale (Smith et al., 2008); Sense of Coherence SOC-13 (Antonovsky, 1987); an adapted Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (Buysse et al., 1989); AUDIT-C (Bush et al., WHO, 1998); and the General Self-Efficacy Scale (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995).
Provided for general information and transparency. This page is not legal or medical advice.
