--- title: "10.2.4 Developing and aligning the eligibility criteria with the objective/s and question/s" canonical: "https://jbi-global-wiki.refined.site/space/MANUAL/355862707/10.2.4%20Developing%20and%20aligning%20the%20eligibility%20criteria%20with%20the%20objective%2Fs%20and%20question%2Fs" format: markdown --- **Table 4: Alignment of objective, review question and PCC** | | | | | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | **Review** | **Objective** | **Review question** | **Population/Participant** | **Concept** | **Context** | **Types of studies** | | Alexander and Cooper (2019) | The objective of this scoping review is to examine and map the range of vocational rehabilitation (VR) available for emergency services (EMS) personnel | 1. Which types of VR interventions have been reported for police, firefighter and ambulance/paramedic personnel from developed countries?
2. What are the characteristics of the VR (including, but not limited to, physical interventions, psychological interventions or mixed content interventions) reported for police, firefighter and EMS personnel from developed countries?
3. In what context (health care setting, work setting or rehabilitation setting) are VR interventions provided for police, firefighter and ambulance/paramedic personnel from developed countries? | Adult EMS personnel (police officers, firefighters and ambulance/paramedic staff) regardless of age, sex or rank
Excluded: Retired personnel | Vocational rehabilitation delivered to EMS personnel regardless of condition, work status (VR to prevent sick leave or VR for workers on sick leave) or focus (e.g. mental health issues, neurological problems or musculoskeletal conditions)
Interventions included work conditioning, work hardening, physiotherapy, counselling, functional restoration and occupational rehabilitation | Developed nations and regions, such as Australia, New Zealand, the United States, Canada, Western Europe and Scandinavia | Published and unpublished studies (quantitative, qualitative and textual evidence sources) were considered, as well as reports on government policy and occupational health websites | | Ingham et al. (2025) | This scoping review aimed to map how occupational therapists evaluate the outcomes of services they provide within primary care | What are the outcome evaluation methods being used by occupational therapists in primary care?
Do the outcome evaluation methods used by occupational therapists in primary care align with the principles of value-based health care? | Qualified occupational therapists, regardless of grade, position or specialty, who provide services within an occupational therapist-specific primary care service or as part of a multidisciplinary team | Literature that described outcome evaluation methods used by occupational therapists in primary care practice and included those used by occupational therapists specifically as well as those used by occupational therapists working as part of a multidisciplinary team | Primary care first-point-of-contact setting
All countries were included, and studies were not limited by race, culture or location | Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods study designs were considered
Systematic reviews, textual evidence papers, professional and government reports, guidelines and unpublished material | | Strifler et al. (2018) | To conduct a scoping review of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models and frameworks that have been used to guide dissemination or implementation of evidence-based interventions targeted to prevention and/or management of cancer or other chronic diseases | What theories or frameworks have been used to inform the implementation or translation of evidence into practice in health care settings? | Not applicable | All theories, models and frameworks relevant to evidence dissemination or implementation, whether developed in health or other fields (e.g. business and social sciences) designed to change behaviour at the level of the individual, organisation, community or system, and (b) targeted to prevention or management of cancer or other types of chronic disease (including chronic mental illness such as mood disorders, including depression and anxiety, schizophrenia, dementia and drug addiction) and related risk factors (such as smoking, exercise, alcohol, diet, hypertension, obesity, tobacco and other risk factor modification) | In all relevant health care and community settings, and for all ages | All study designs, including experimental, quasi-experimental, observational and qualitative | | Tricco et al. (2024) | This scoping review sought to summarise the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on gender equity interventions within any workplace setting. Additional objectives were to determine whether any interventions considered the intersection of gender and other variables and if any studies reported the PROGRESS-Plus equity variables | What interventions have been examined in randomised controlled trials to optimise gender equity in all sectors, and how can these interventions be implemented in academic health? | Adults in any employment sector,
including all academia, industry, law, government, education and
business | Any intervention designed to promote gender equity that targeted (a) individuals (e.g. training in diversity, unconscious bias, mentorship or coaching), (b) organisations (e.g. policies designed to address gender inequity, workplace code of conduct or implementation of equity, diversity and inclusion action plan at the government level) or (c) systems (e.g. legislation to publicly report salaries, legislation to mandate equitable representation on committees, or pay equity) | All
employment
sectors, including
(but not limited to)
academic health
, industry, law, government,
education,
business
and
science, technology, engineering
and mathematics (STEM) | Only RCTs or quasi-randomised controlled trials were included | | Tricco et al. (2023a) | To identify machine learning (ML) tools in hospital settings and how they were implemented to inform decision-making for patient care through a scoping review | What ML interventions have been used to inform decision-making for patient care in hospital settings?
What strategies have been used to implement these ML interventions? | Any type of clinician caring for any type of patient | Machine learning tools used by hospital clinicians to inform decision-making for patient care, such as AI-based computerised decision support systems or ‘model-based’ decision support systems | Only hospital settings | Primary research studies of experimental, quasi-experimental, observational, qualitative and mixed methods design, with or without a comparator group | | Davies et al. (2023) | This scoping review sought to map the literature that documents or utilises patient journey mapping methodologies in health care and to document and describe the methods and approaches used to report these projects | What approaches are being adopted to map patient journeys through health systems?
What justifications are provided for undertaking patient journey mapping research?
How are studies that use a patient journey mapping methodology in health services described and documented in the academic literature? | Not applicable | The concept being explored was the mapping of patient journeys through health care systems and services as a method of collecting, analysing and presenting data for research or quality improvement projects | The context included all settings where patients are provided with health care services | Peer-reviewed primary research articles that used or described a patient journey mapping methodology, limiting the search to published peer-reviewed journal articles, theses and dissertations |