ABSTRACT

Resilience is a burgeoning focus in health research; yet, researchers have varying conceptual and methodological approaches to understanding resilience across populations. Consequently, there is little consensus on the definition or operationalization of resilience. The objective of the present study was to conduct a scoping review of qualitative health research from the United States to connect methodological approaches with operationalization and definitions. From our initial database search of 2,142 articles, we reviewed 29 articles that met the criteria for assessment. Our review revealed: (1) definitions of resilience followed two main pathways pursuing broad or context-specific definitions and (2) operationalization originated from previous research or developed during data collection and/or analysis using emic approaches. We offer a conceptual mapping of resilience and argue that researchers should attend to the emergence of resilience in their study population and give greater consideration to the implications of methodologies for future research.

摘要

复原力是健康研究的一个新兴焦点；然而，研究人员有不同的概念和方法论方法来理解不同人群的复原力。因此，对于弹性的定义或操作化几乎没有共识。本研究的目的是对美国的定性健康研究进行范围审查，以将方法学方法与操作化和定义联系起来。从我们最初对 2,142 篇文章的数据库搜索中，我们审查了 29 篇符合评估标准的文章。我们的审查显示：(1) 弹性的定义遵循两条主要途径，追求广泛或特定背景的定义；(2) 操作化源于先前的研究或在数据收集和/或分析期间使用 emic 方法开发。