{"title":"通过应用于患有唐氏综合症的年轻成人的生活,继续将 QOL 概念化","authors":"Rhonda Faragher, Jan Lloyd","doi":"10.1111/jppi.12479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Quality of Life (QOL) has been used as a sensitising concept for decades, inviting all to consider the potential for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities to live a life full of meaning and purpose. This article presents the outcomes of our deliberations on domains of QOL undertaken for a study investigating lives of young adults with Down syndrome. Various groups have published domains and from these we distilled a list of six: Physical well-being, Emotional well-being; Self-determination; Material well-being; Personal beliefs and development; and Social inclusion. Our synthesis of domains raised two issues for further deliberation in the community of QOL scholars in the field of intellectual and developmental disability: the place of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and Rights. ICT has not been considered as a domain but we argue it could be. Rights have been included as a domain by some researchers in previous conceptualisations but we do not. Instead we suggest they may be better placed as an underpinning principle, with fundamental impact on all aspects of QOL. A conclusion we are left with is that domains, while helpful for research, can never be a fixed list. What matters to individuals and society in general in framing lives of meaning and purpose will change over time. Even so, there is still value and need for setting domains for specific research studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":47236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jppi.12479","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Continuing conceptualising QOL through application to lives of young adults with Down syndrome\",\"authors\":\"Rhonda Faragher, Jan Lloyd\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jppi.12479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Quality of Life (QOL) has been used as a sensitising concept for decades, inviting all to consider the potential for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities to live a life full of meaning and purpose. This article presents the outcomes of our deliberations on domains of QOL undertaken for a study investigating lives of young adults with Down syndrome. Various groups have published domains and from these we distilled a list of six: Physical well-being, Emotional well-being; Self-determination; Material well-being; Personal beliefs and development; and Social inclusion. Our synthesis of domains raised two issues for further deliberation in the community of QOL scholars in the field of intellectual and developmental disability: the place of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and Rights. ICT has not been considered as a domain but we argue it could be. Rights have been included as a domain by some researchers in previous conceptualisations but we do not. Instead we suggest they may be better placed as an underpinning principle, with fundamental impact on all aspects of QOL. A conclusion we are left with is that domains, while helpful for research, can never be a fixed list. What matters to individuals and society in general in framing lives of meaning and purpose will change over time. Even so, there is still value and need for setting domains for specific research studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jppi.12479\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jppi.12479\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jppi.12479","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
几十年来,"生活质量"(QOL)一直是一个具有感召力的概念,它邀请所有人考虑智力和发育障碍人士过上充满意义和目标的生活的潜力。本文介绍了我们在一项调查唐氏综合症年轻成人生活的研究中对 QOL 领域的讨论结果。不同的团体已经公布了不同的领域,我们从中提炼出了六个领域:身体健康、情感幸福、自我决定、物质幸福、个人信仰和发展以及社会包容。我们对各领域的综合提出了两个问题,供智力和发育障碍领域的 QOL 学者进一步讨论:信息和通信技术(ICT)的地位以及权利。信息与传播技术尚未被视为一个领域,但我们认为它可以被视为一个领域。一些研究人员在以前的概念中将权利作为一个领域,但我们没有这样做。相反,我们认为将其作为一项基本原则可能更好,因为它对 QOL 的各个方面都有根本性的影响。我们得出的结论是,领域虽然有助于研究,但永远不可能是一个固定的清单。对于个人和整个社会来说,在构建有意义和有目的的生活时,什么是最重要的,会随着时间的推移而改变。即便如此,为特定研究设定领域仍然有其价值和必要性。
Continuing conceptualising QOL through application to lives of young adults with Down syndrome
Quality of Life (QOL) has been used as a sensitising concept for decades, inviting all to consider the potential for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities to live a life full of meaning and purpose. This article presents the outcomes of our deliberations on domains of QOL undertaken for a study investigating lives of young adults with Down syndrome. Various groups have published domains and from these we distilled a list of six: Physical well-being, Emotional well-being; Self-determination; Material well-being; Personal beliefs and development; and Social inclusion. Our synthesis of domains raised two issues for further deliberation in the community of QOL scholars in the field of intellectual and developmental disability: the place of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and Rights. ICT has not been considered as a domain but we argue it could be. Rights have been included as a domain by some researchers in previous conceptualisations but we do not. Instead we suggest they may be better placed as an underpinning principle, with fundamental impact on all aspects of QOL. A conclusion we are left with is that domains, while helpful for research, can never be a fixed list. What matters to individuals and society in general in framing lives of meaning and purpose will change over time. Even so, there is still value and need for setting domains for specific research studies.