3.3.8 Identifying eligibility criteria for the review

Eligibility criteria are a fundamental consideration in a qualitative systematic review. They provide a clear framework for selecting studies and maintaining the focus of the review. This enhances transparency and reproducibility and minimises bias in the study selection process.

Both the research question and eligibility criteria are intrinsically linked, as they guide the selection and inclusion of studies in the review. Eligibility criteria should be closely aligned with the research question or objective of the review. This alignment ensures that the selected studies are relevant in addressing the research objectives.

Eligibility criteria should be reasonable, sound (based on scientific arguments) and, for a JBI qualitative systematic review, eligibility should be based on the PICo framework. Eligibility criteria are not intended to be considered in isolation. They should be articulated to be as mutually exclusive as possible and not repeat information relevant to other aspects of the PICo.

The following areas should be considered when developing eligibility criteria:

• (P) Population/Participants
  Clearly describe the characteristics of the population being examined in the review, ensuring factors related to equity, diversity and inclusion are mentioned. This can include factors such as age, gender, ethnicity, clinical or socio-economic characteristics and any relevant health conditions or other variables.

• (I) Phenomenon of interest
  A phenomenon of interest, in the context of a qualitative systematic review, refers to a specific subject, concept or occurrence that is the central focus of investigation. It is an aspect of the real world that researchers aim to understand, explore or explain. Phenomena of interest can be diverse and encompass a wide range of topics, from human experiences, expectations, social behaviours and natural occurrences to complex processes.

  The phenomenon of interest serves as the central theme or subject around which the review revolves. Clearly state the phenomenon of interest that the included studies should address. There should be congruence between the review question and the phenomenon of interest. This ensures that the review remains focused on the specific aspects to be explored.

  Examples of phenomena of interest include:

  • Coping strategies of caregivers of individuals with Alzheimer’s disease.

  • Individuals’ experiences of living with chronic pain and their interactions with healthcare providers.

  • Perceptions and attitudes of healthcare professionals towards the implementation of telemedicine in rural healthcare settings.

  • Emotional experiences and support needs of parents of children with autism spectrum disorders.

  • Cultural factors influencing dietary choices and nutrition among immigrant communities in urban areas.

• (Co) Context
  The context is a crucial aspect of defining eligibility criteria in a systematic review, as it plays a significant role in shaping the relevance and applicability of the included studies.

  Examples of context include:

  • The specific setting in which the studies should be conducted. This might include healthcare facilities, community centres, schools or other relevant environments.

  • Any cultural, social or economic factors that may be relevant.

  • Geographic location or regional grouping.

  • Specific interests related to ethnicity or gender.

  • Details about the healthcare system or structure. This could be a specific type of healthcare system, such as public or private, or a model of care.

Types of studies

Eligibility criteria should also consider the characteristics of the studies to be included. In a qualitative systematic review, these may include:

• Methodological approach: Specify the qualitative research approaches that are eligible for inclusion, such as ethnography, grounded theory, phenomenology, qualitative content analysis, qualitative descriptive or others, based on the research focus. Findings from mixed-methods studies may be included if the qualitative component can be identified, extracted and analysed. The meta-aggregative approach is usually inclusive of all types of qualitative research regardless of philosophical perspective, methodology or methods.

• Data sources: Describe the types of data sources that are relevant, such as interviews, focus groups, observations, visual or art-based artefacts, documentary or other qualitative data, depending on the review objectives.

• Publication status: Indicate whether the review will include published studies, unpublished reports or other forms of qualitative data sources that align with the research goals.

• Language: Specify the primary language of the qualitative data sources and if relevant, whether sources in other languages will be included. This decision should align with the research focus. JBI recommends being as inclusive as possible unless there is good reason for restricting the language criteria (Dankel & Lambert 2023).

• Time of publication:

  • Determine the range of publication date or timeframe within which the data sources should have been conducted or published. The timeframe should be justified in relation to the review question.

  • Determine whether a limit on the range of publication date or timeframe is required. It is important to provide a clear justification for the chosen publication timeframe and explain how it aligns with the research objectives and focus of the review.