Wellbeing in education has gained increasing attention in recent years as a vital factor in the overall success and happiness of all students (Spratt, 2017; Norwich, Moore, Stentiford, & Hall, 2021). Wellbeing for children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is equally important as it is for other children´s overall development and quality of life. Children with ADHD often need specialized support services to meet their unique needs and experience holistic wellbeing. Psychological and educational counseling, hereafter termed ‘support services’ are labeled and organized differently in various countries. Albeit the various labeling and organizations, the main objective of support systems globally is to help schools and teachers to develop supportive and inclusive learning environments for all children with a distinctive focus on children with special needs. The study aims to offer a review of how support services understand, perceive, and approach the concept of wellbeing. There are different reasons why a focus on wellbeing in relation to support services is important. First, children with special needs are globally known to suffer from lower levels of wellbeing compared to the general student population (Moreira. et al., 2015). Second, support services are also increasingly expected to help schools develop inclusive learning environments for all learners. So, there is a need to investigate how support services perceive and approach the concept of wellbeing in their work. This study seeks to contribute by providing a comprehensive, systemic, and unbiased overview of the current state of knowledge on the topic. Further, the study contributes to identifying gaps in the literature that may inform future research.

Theoretical framework:Holistic and comprehensive wellbeing

well-being is a complex construct (Ryan and Deci, 2017). Although the meaning of wellbeing has not been adequately worked out in education (Dodge, Daly, Huyton, & Sanders, 2012)., and there is little consensus on the definition of wellbeing (Hooker et al., 2020), wellbeing theories do generally agree that wellbeing is multidimensional with the number of wellbeing dimensions ranging from 3 to 12 (Roscoe, 2009). The consistency that exists in describing the nature of wellbeing in most of the models and definitions, presents common threads. First, most authors base their definition on WHO´s definition that wellbeing is not merely the absence of sickness and infirmity (Roscoe, 2009). Second, according to Roscoe, wellbeing is described as multidimensional in terms of various factors that interact in a complex, integrated and synergistic fashion. Each dimension is integral to the whole and no one dimension operates independently. They are eight dimensions that are reviewed by major theories so far (Hooker et al., 2020). They are social, physical, psychological, intellectual, spiritual, emotional, environmental, and financial (Roscoe, 2009; Adams et al, 2000; Linton, et al., 2016; Hooker, et al., 2020; Montoya, et al., 2021). Holistic and comprehensive wellbeing approach allows students to maintain a level of psychological balance that impacts their physical, social, emotional, and spiritual dimensions. A focus on strengths and personal responsibility rather than dependence or problems and a belief in the capacity to exert personal control in managing total needs. The notion of holistic and comprehensive wellbeing approach is distinct due to its focus on students’ interests, skills, strengths, abilities, and potential to achieve personal goals (Hargreaves, & Shirley, 2021). This approach engenders a positive attitude rather than focusing only on problems and issues. This perspective sparks internal motivation and strengthens an optimistic attitude. This approach offers a holistic framework in which to view a child as a whole being (physical, emotional, social, intellectual, environmental, psychological, cultural, and spiritual dimensions). This approach capitalizes on strengths, abilities, and personal aspirations to take on and fulfill meaningful roles in their learning and development.

Search strategy A comprehensive search of academic databases and journals was conducted using a systematic literature review (SLR). The reason for choosing SLS is as it is a methodical, rigorous, and transparent way of finding, collecting, appraising, and synthesizing all relevant research on a specific research question (Newman, & Gough, 2019). It involves a pre-defined protocol, explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria, and an assessment of the risk of bias in the studies included (Xiao, & Watson, 2019). The available sources included academic databases such as the Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), Web of Science (WoS), Education Source (ES), APA PsychInfo, and Scopus. Inclusion and exclusion criteria The quality of studies was assessed using established criteria of inclusion of only peer-reviewed journal articles and doctorate dissertations published in the last 10 years. Terms used to define wellbeing and support system are challenging as they greatly vary in usage and meaning. A list of key search words (terms) for inclusion and exclusion was developed. All possible terms were included that are used in the existing literature. The electronic search returned a total of 9261 articles. This is followed by screening the titles and abstracts of all articles to determine candidacy for inclusion in the review by using Rayyan. Rayyan is a web-based platform for systematic literature review that allows users to search, filter, screen, and double-screen articles from various databases. An article was excluded if the title or abstract contained words that aligned with the exclusion criteria. For example, it contained the word “university students”. If the title and abstract did not include any of excluded words, the method section was scanned to determine if the article satisfied one or more of the inclusion criteria. The double screening was carried out to settle the “conflict” and “maybe” categories in Rayyan. Using this process 9 abstracts were identified to be considered to get the full text. Another round of screening will be carried out by reading the full text of 9 articles. Although Rayyan allows users to collaborate during the screening process (with the categorization of live chatting, maybe, conflict, included, excluded, and undecided), 3 of the studies were difficult to decide by reading their titles, abstracts, and keywords only. The purpose of this additional screening of full texted articles is to make sure that these articles meet the pre-defined criteria.

This review aims to highlight the research, policy, and implication for practice from the existing literature. For this, selective articles will be considered for extracting and summarizing the data. Synthesizing and summarizing the main findings of the selective studies included in the review may help to understand and explore how wellbeing is perceived and applied by support services for children with ADHD. Considering the risk of bias assessment at this point, data will be extracted from the included studies, checked, and agreed upon by all the researchers in the study. The perception and implementation of wellbeing by support services within each respective wellbeing dimension will be described and findings within these wellbeing dimensions will be grouped into themes for discussion. The quality and limitations of the included studies will be reported. It is also expected to identify gaps in the literature that need to be addressed in future research and practice, such as the need for more research to consider holistic wellbeing for children with other special needs for example autism. The review identified studies across a range of ages, thus this review considers children and adolescents of school age (6- 18 years old). A systematic review of literature considering children younger than 6 years, kindergarten group, is necessary to be considered to have a comprehensive understanding of the perception and implementation of wellbeing by support services for children with ADHD. Reporting the methodology, and systematic literature review, clearly and transparently in the research paper may inspire other researchers to use this comprehensive methodology in other areas of research including special education.

Adams, T. B. et al., (2000). Conceptualization and measurement of the spiritual and psychological dimensions of wellness in a college population. Journal of American College Health, 48(4), 165- 173. Dodge, R., Daly, A. P., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. D (2012). The challenge of defining well- being. International Journal of Well-being, 2(3), 222-235. Hooker, S. A. et al., (2020). Multiple dimensions of wellness: Development and psychometric properties of the Anschutz Wellness Evaluation 360 (AWE 360). Journal of Well-being Assessment, 4(2020), 95- 119. Linton M-J., Dieppe P., Medina-Lara A. (2016). Review of 99 self-report measures for assessing wellbeing in adults: exploring dimensions of well-being and developments over time. BMJ Open, 6, doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015- 010641 Montoya, A. L. & Summers, L. L. (2021). 8 dimensions of wellness for educators. The Learning professional, 42(1), 50- 62. Moreira et al., (2015). Subjective wellbeing in students with special educational needs. Cognition, Brain, Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal, XIX(1), 75–97. Newman, M., & Gough, D. (2019). Systematic reviews in educational research: Methodology, perspectives, and application. In O, Zawacki-Richter, M. Kerrs, S. Bedenlier, M. Bond, K. Buntins (Eds.). Systematic reviews in educational research: methodology, perspectives and application. Springer Norwich, B., Moore, D., Stentiford, L., & Hall, D. (2021). A critical consideration of ´mental health and wellbeing´ in education: thinking about school aims in terms of wellbeing. British Educational Research Journal, 1-18. DOI: 10.1002/berj.3795 Roscoe, L. J. (2009). Wellness: A review of theory and measurement for counselors. Journal of Counseling and Development, 87, 216- 226. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. The Guilford Press. Spratt, J. (2017). Wellbeing, Equity and Education; A Critical Analysis of Policy Discourses of Wellbeing in Schools. Switzerland: Springer. Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93-112.