SynthesisJournal of immigrant and minority health2026
Have We Been Measuring Migrant Wellbeing all Wrong? Conceptualizing Migrant Wellbeing: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of immigrant and minority health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.