com.atlassian.confluence.content.render.xhtml.migration.exceptions.UnknownMacroMigrationException: The macro 'datalayer.push(arguments);' is unknown.

5.2.3.1 Identifying your eligibility criteria / PICO framework

Owned by Carolyn Phillips
Mar 26, 2024
2 min read

Inclusion criteria:

Eligibility criteria should be reasonable, sound (based on scientific arguments), and based on the PICo framework. These criteria will be used in the selection process when it is decided if an evidence source will be included or not in the review. Inclusion criteria for a review are not intended to be considered in isolation; in this regard they should be articulated to be as mutually exclusive as possible and not repeat information relevant to other aspects of the PICo.

Two categories of eligibility criteria should be considered: eligibility criteria based on the PICo characteristics, and eligibility criteria based on publication characteristics. Eligibility criteria based on PICo characteristics are those related to the types of participants and settings, types of interventions or phenomena of interest, and types of textual papers (narrative, expert opinion or policy). Eligibility criteria based on publication characteristics are those related to publication date, and type of publication, etc.  Usually, reviewers use the PICo framework (participants, intervention or phenomena of interest, and context) to construct a clear and meaningful review objective/question regarding the textual evidence. The reviewer uses the same PICo framework to develop eligibility criteria based on textual characteristics. The eligibility criteria must provide adequate details about the conceptual and operational definitions of each element to enable reviewers to make reliable decisions when making decisions to include studies.

Population/Type of participants

Describe the population, giving attention to whether specific characteristics of interest, such as age, sex and gender, and level of education or professional qualification are important to the question. These specific characteristics should be stated. Specific reference to population characteristics, either for inclusion or exclusion should be based on a clear justification rather than personal reasoning. The term population is used but is considered from a different perspective in textual reviews.  Aspects of population pertinent to quantitative reviews such as sampling methods, sample sizes or homogeneity are may not be significant or appropriate in a review of textual evidence.

Types of interventions / Phenomena of interest

Is there a specific intervention or phenomenon of interest? As with other types of reviews, phenomena may include broad areas of health care, or specific experiences. However, reviews of textual data may also reflect an interest in opinions around power, politics or other aspects of health care other than direct interventions, in which case, these should be described in detail.

Context

In a textual review, context will vary depending on the objective and question(s) of the review. Context may include but is not limited to consideration of:

  • Cultural or sub-cultural factors;

  • Geographic location;

  • Specific racial or gender-based interests; or

  • Detail about the specific setting (such as acute care, primary health care, or the community).


It is important to consider the context, or the consequences (impact) that will be the focus of the review.

Types of publications/evidence sources

The type of text that is being extracted, for example, a narrative paper/piece, an expert opinion, a consensus guideline, policy reports or reports accessed from web pages of professional organizations.

Â