Debela Salsawi Feleke, McShane Sheenagh, Carpenter Lauren, McMichael Celia, Singh Ankur, Block Karen
Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
School of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
J Immigr Minor Health. 2025 Sep 10. doi: 10.1007/s10903-025-01773-z.
Wellbeing is a widely used concept yet lacks a universal definition and standardized measurement. Migrants, especially those forcibly displaced, face challenges that impact their quality of life and wellbeing. To understand how the wellbeing of people who migrate from low/middle-income countries to middle/high-income countries has been conceptualized, defined, and measured. Four databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) were searched. Two researchers independently screened all articles, with narrative synthesis and the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist used for analysis. The search returned 5,610 articles, with 126 included in this review. Of these 126 articles, 89 did not explicitly define nor conceptualise wellbeing. Forty-three measurement tools were used to measure the wellbeing of 281,478 migrants in more than 35 countries. Seven tools were used in three or more articles, two of which were not specifically designed for wellbeing measurement. Two tools Personal Wellbeing Index (PWI) and WHO Quality of life Brief (WHOQoL-BREF) had satisfactory COSMIN scores. Fewer than half (47.6%) of the articles reported translating tools into respondents' languages. Tools designed and developed in the context of Global North, middle-class populations, might not accurately measure wellbeing in migrant groups. This review highlights critical gaps in the way migrant wellbeing is measured. Without culturally informed tools, understanding of migrant wellbeing will remain fragmented, limiting development of effective and equitable public health interventions and policies.
幸福是一个广泛使用的概念，但缺乏通用的定义和标准化的衡量方法。移民，尤其是那些被迫流离失所的人，面临着影响他们生活质量和幸福的挑战。为了了解从低收入/中等收入国家移民到中等收入/高收入国家的人们的幸福是如何被概念化、定义和衡量的。我们检索了四个数据库（MEDLINE、PubMed、EMBASE和PsycINFO）。两名研究人员独立筛选了所有文章，并采用叙述性综合分析以及基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准（COSMIN）清单进行分析。检索结果为5610篇文章，本综述纳入了126篇。在这126篇文章中，89篇没有明确界定幸福的概念。43种测量工具用于测量35多个国家的281478名移民的幸福状况。七种工具在三篇或更多文章中被使用，其中两种并非专门为幸福测量而设计。两种工具——个人幸福指数（PWI）和世界卫生组织生活质量简表（WHOQoL-BREF）的COSMIN评分令人满意。不到一半（47.6%）的文章报告了将工具翻译成受访者的语言。在全球北方中产阶级人群背景下设计和开发的工具可能无法准确测量移民群体的幸福状况。本综述突出了移民幸福测量方式中的关键差距。如果没有考虑文化因素的工具，对移民幸福的理解将仍然支离破碎，限制有效和公平的公共卫生干预措施及政策的制定。
