Table_6_Conceptualizations of well-being in adults with visual impairment: A scoping review.doc

BackgroundDespite its ubiquity, it is often not clear what organizations and services mean by well-being. Visual impairment (VI) has been associated with poorer well-being and well-being has become a key outcome for support and services for adults living with VI. A shared understanding of what well-being means is therefore essential to enable assessment of well-being and cross-service provision of well-being support.
ObjectivesTo provide an overview of the ways in which well-being has been conceptualized in research relating to adults living with VI.
Eligibility criteriaArticles were included in the review if the article discussed well-being in the context of adults living with VI, was available in English and as a full text.
Data sourcesA systematic search using search terms relating to VI and well-being was conducted in EBSCOHost (Medline, CINHL) and Ovid (Embase Classic, Embase, Emcare 1995, Health + Psychosocial, HMIC Health Management Info, APA, PsycArticles, PsycInfo, PsycTests).
ChartingA team of three reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full-texts articles and extracted data. Ambiguous articles were referred to the research group and discussed.
ResultsOf 10,662 articles identified in the search, 249 were included in the review. These referred to 38 types of well-being. The most common types were general well-being (n = 101; 40.6%) emotional well-being (n = 86, 34.5%) and psychological well-being (n = 66, 26.5%). Most articles (n = 150; 60.2%) referred to one type only, with a maximum of 9 listed in one article. A large number of articles did not clearly define well-being. A wide range of indicators of well-being related to the domains of hedonia, mood, positive and negative affect, quality of life, mental health, eudaimonia, self/identity, health, psychological reactions to disability and health problems, functioning, social functioning and environment, were extracted, many of which were used just once.
ConclusionsThere remains a lack of consensus on how well-being is conceptualized and assessed in the context of adult VI. A standardized multi-domain approach derived with input from adults with VI and practitioners working with them is required to enable comparison of findings and cross-organizational provision of support.

研究背景 尽管福祉（well-being）概念应用广泛，但各类机构与服务体系对其内涵的界定往往并不清晰。视力障碍（Visual Impairment, VI）与较差的福祉水平存在关联，而福祉已成为视力障碍成年群体支持与服务的核心结局指标。因此，对福祉的内涵达成共识，是开展福祉评估、跨服务提供福祉支持的必要前提。
研究目标 系统梳理视力障碍成年群体相关研究中福祉的概念化路径。
纳入标准 本综述纳入的文献需同时满足以下条件：以视力障碍成年群体为研究场景探讨福祉，且为英文全文文献。
数据来源 本研究在EBSCOHost（含Medline、CINHL）及Ovid（含Embase Classic、Embase、Emcare 1995、Health + Psychosocial、HMIC Health Management Info、APA、PsycArticles、PsycInfo、PsycTests）数据库中，采用与视力障碍、福祉相关的检索词开展系统性检索。
文献筛选与数据提取 由3名评审人员组成的团队对文献标题、摘要及全文进行筛查，并提取相关数据。对于存疑的文献，提交至研究小组讨论判定。
研究结果 本次检索共识别出10662篇文献，最终纳入249篇进行综述。这些文献共涉及38种福祉概念类型，其中最常见的为总体福祉（general well-being，n=101，占比40.6%）、情绪福祉（emotional well-being，n=86，占比34.5%）及心理福祉（psychological well-being，n=66，占比26.5%）。多数文献（n=150，占比60.2%）仅提及1种福祉类型，单篇文献最多提及9种。此外，大量文献未对福祉的内涵作出明确定义。本研究共提取到与多类福祉维度相关的指标，包括享乐幸福感（hedonia）、情绪、正负性情绪、生活质量、心理健康、实现论幸福感（eudaimonia）、自我/身份认同、健康状况、对残疾与健康问题的心理反应、功能状态、社会功能及社会环境等，其中多数指标仅被使用一次。
研究结论 目前在视力障碍成年群体的场景中，福祉的概念化与评估方式仍未达成共识。未来需要结合视力障碍成年群体及其服务从业者的意见，构建标准化的多维度福祉研究框架，以实现研究结果的跨研究比较与跨机构福祉支持服务供给。