Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38090042›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in sports and active living2023

Clarifying concepts: "Well-being" in sport.

Lisa Raquel Trainor, Andrea Bundon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lisa Raquel TrainorSchool of Kinesiology, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Andrea BundonSchool of Kinesiology, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this commentary is to critique the application of well-being in the field of sport and exercise psychology and to provide recommendations for future research. Over the last decade well-being has been an increasingly popular concept under investigation. In the field of sport and exercise psychology, numerous scholars have examined and conducted research on well-being of athletes. While this research has resulted in an abundance of findings, there is concern in how the concept of well-being was applied, defined, and measured. The construct of well-being can be traced back to two distinct perspectives, hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being. These perspectives of well-being are based on different philosophical assumptions, and while they are compatible, they are theoretically distinct. In sport and exercise psychology, well-being has lacked consistent operationalization and measurement (i.e., theoretical alignment, single dimensions of hedonic or eudaimonic measured to make claims about the broader well-being constructs), is vague and loosely defined, and is often studied in isolation from a well-being perspective (i.e., no theoretical foundation). We conclude by offering three recommendations to move the field of well-being in sport research forward.

Indexed as

athlete well-beingeudaimonic well-beingeudamoniahedoniahedonic well-beingpsychological wellbeingsubjective wellbeing

Identifiers

PMID38090042
PMCPMC10713850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.