Krista Kauppi, Antero Vanhala, Eira Roos, P. Torkki
{"title":"评估健康模型的结构和领域:一个系统的回顾","authors":"Krista Kauppi, Antero Vanhala, Eira Roos, P. Torkki","doi":"10.5502/ijw.v13i2.2619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This study systematically identifies different wellness domains, explores whether we are reaching any consensus, and presents an archetype of a wellness model. Methods: Studies were selected for review if they proposed a model for assessing individuals’ wellness, the model was generic (i.e., non-context or disease-specific), designed for adults and included at least physical, psychological and social domains. Furthermore, the study needed to be peer-reviewed with a full-text available in English. Based on this, 44 models were identified and their domains were extracted and grouped using thematic analysis, and placed under themes that were created using quantitative methods. Publication year and formed groupings were used to examine the evolution of models. Median, mode, and percentages were used to form the archetype. Results: The investigated models included 379 unique domains that could be clustered into 70 groups and under 14 themes. While the numbers of published wellness models increased, no consensus on the domains was reached. The majority of the models were presented at one level with five domains. Conclusions: Incorporating wellness into everyday practice requires comparable measures to evaluate and benchmark outcomes. Hence, we need to reach a mutual understanding on the structure and domains of wellness.","PeriodicalId":36390,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Wellbeing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the structures and domains of wellness models: A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Krista Kauppi, Antero Vanhala, Eira Roos, P. Torkki\",\"doi\":\"10.5502/ijw.v13i2.2619\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: This study systematically identifies different wellness domains, explores whether we are reaching any consensus, and presents an archetype of a wellness model. Methods: Studies were selected for review if they proposed a model for assessing individuals’ wellness, the model was generic (i.e., non-context or disease-specific), designed for adults and included at least physical, psychological and social domains. Furthermore, the study needed to be peer-reviewed with a full-text available in English. Based on this, 44 models were identified and their domains were extracted and grouped using thematic analysis, and placed under themes that were created using quantitative methods. Publication year and formed groupings were used to examine the evolution of models. Median, mode, and percentages were used to form the archetype. Results: The investigated models included 379 unique domains that could be clustered into 70 groups and under 14 themes. While the numbers of published wellness models increased, no consensus on the domains was reached. The majority of the models were presented at one level with five domains. Conclusions: Incorporating wellness into everyday practice requires comparable measures to evaluate and benchmark outcomes. Hence, we need to reach a mutual understanding on the structure and domains of wellness.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Wellbeing\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Wellbeing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v13i2.2619\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Economics, Econometrics and Finance\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Wellbeing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v13i2.2619","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessing the structures and domains of wellness models: A systematic review
Objective: This study systematically identifies different wellness domains, explores whether we are reaching any consensus, and presents an archetype of a wellness model. Methods: Studies were selected for review if they proposed a model for assessing individuals’ wellness, the model was generic (i.e., non-context or disease-specific), designed for adults and included at least physical, psychological and social domains. Furthermore, the study needed to be peer-reviewed with a full-text available in English. Based on this, 44 models were identified and their domains were extracted and grouped using thematic analysis, and placed under themes that were created using quantitative methods. Publication year and formed groupings were used to examine the evolution of models. Median, mode, and percentages were used to form the archetype. Results: The investigated models included 379 unique domains that could be clustered into 70 groups and under 14 themes. While the numbers of published wellness models increased, no consensus on the domains was reached. The majority of the models were presented at one level with five domains. Conclusions: Incorporating wellness into everyday practice requires comparable measures to evaluate and benchmark outcomes. Hence, we need to reach a mutual understanding on the structure and domains of wellness.