ArticleAustralian occupational therapy journal2026
Occupational resilience: Scoping review of conceptualisations and applications in contexts of adversity.
Article in Australian occupational therapy journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Revisiting the conceptualisation of occupational resilience.Australian occupational therapy journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOccupational resilience has emerged as a construct that links the capacity to face adversity with the role of meaningful occupations in the adaptation and recovery of individuals, groups, and communities. However, its definition, theoretical frameworks, and applications remain heterogeneous and partial. This lack of systematisation hinders its integration into occupational therapy and occupational science.
objectiveThe objective of this study is to map and synthesise the scientific literature on occupational resilience, identifying how it is conceptualised and operationalised.
methodsUsing established scoping review frameworks, publications from 2000 to 2025 were searched in databases and through manual searching, including empirical studies and conceptual literature that addressed occupational resilience and its relationship with occupational participation in contexts of adversity. CONSUMER AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: There was no direct participation of consumers or community representatives in the design, conduct, or interpretation of the findings of this study.
resultsThirty-seven studies were included that show diverse uses of the term occupational resilience and related concepts, tending to conceptualise it as a trait, an individual capacity, a dynamic process, and an adaptive outcome linked to occupational performance. The findings highlight the role of meaningful occupations in modulating suffering and emotional activation and in rebuilding purpose, agency, roles, routines, and identities after adversity. They also reveal marked differences in definitions, measures, and designs, with a predominance of approaches focussed on individual resilience, mainly in work-related contexts, and limited attention to structural dimensions and occupational justice.
conclusionThis review offers a structured view of occupational resilience and of the place that meaningful occupations occupy in resilience processes, proposing a process-oriented definition that articulates personal, contextual, and occupational dimensions. The results underscore the need to define integrated theoretical frameworks and occupational therapy interventions explicitly oriented towards the occupational effects of trauma, which validate pain, support the restoration and reinvention of occupational participation, and question the social conditions that make sustained resilience necessary.
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.