Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLinton, M-J
dc.contributor.authorDieppe, P
dc.contributor.authorMedina-Lara, A
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-05T09:18:36Z
dc.date.issued2016-07-07
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: Investigators within many disciplines are using measures of well-being, but it is not always clear what they are measuring, or which instruments may best meet their objectives. The aims of this review were to: systematically identify well-being instruments, explore the variety of well-being dimensions within instruments and describe how the production of instruments has developed over time. DESIGN: Systematic searches, thematic analysis and narrative synthesis were undertaken. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, EconLit, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from 1993 to 2014 complemented by web searches and expert consultations through 2015. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Instruments were selected for review if they were designed for adults (≥18 years old), generic (ie, non-disease or context specific) and available in an English version. RESULTS: A total of 99 measures of well-being were included, and 196 dimensions of well-being were identified within them. Dimensions clustered around 6 key thematic domains: mental well-being, social well-being, physical well-being, spiritual well-being, activities and functioning, and personal circumstances. Authors were rarely explicit about how existing theories had influenced the design of their tools; however, the 2 most referenced theories were Diener's model of subjective well-being and the WHO definition of health. The period between 1990 and 1999 produced the greatest number of newly developed well-being instruments (n=27). An illustration of the dimensions identified and the instruments that measure them is provided within a thematic framework of well-being. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides researchers with an organised toolkit of instruments, dimensions and an accompanying glossary. The striking variability between instruments supports the need to pay close attention to what is being assessed under the umbrella of 'well-being' measurement.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipThis research was supported by a University of Exeter Medical School PhD Studentship.en_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 6 (7), article e010641en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010641
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/34199
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Groupen_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27388349en_GB
dc.rightsThis is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/en_GB
dc.subjectAdultsen_GB
dc.subjectGenericen_GB
dc.subjectMeasuresen_GB
dc.subjectQuality of lifeen_GB
dc.subjectWell-beingen_GB
dc.subjectActivities of Daily Livingen_GB
dc.subjectHealth Statusen_GB
dc.subjectHumansen_GB
dc.subjectMental Healthen_GB
dc.subjectSelf Reporten_GB
dc.subjectSpiritualityen_GB
dc.subjectSurveys and Questionnairesen_GB
dc.titleReview of 99 self-report measures for assessing well-being in adults: exploring dimensions of well-being and developments over timeen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2018-10-05T09:18:36Z
exeter.place-of-publicationEnglanden_GB
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available from BMJ Publishing Group via the DOI in this record.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalBMJ Openen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record