Skip to main content

Table 1 Eligibility criteria for study inclusion

From: Factors that influence the implementation of e-health: a systematic review of systematic reviews (an update)

Population Healthcare settings (including but not limited to primary, intermediate, secondary, home care).
All healthcare settings were considered.
Not limited by: clinical area, health concern; the type of patient receiving the e-health technology; the type of health professional delivering care or country.
Intervention e-Health technologies (including management systems, such as electronic health records that allow the acquisition, transmission and storage of patient data; computerised decision support systems including diagnostic support, alerts and reminder systems; communication systems such as telecommunication that act as an intermediary between users; and information resources such as the Internet)
Comparator This review was not limited to comparator studies.
Outcomes Qualitative data on factors that inhibit or promote implementation of e-health.
Study type Papers were included if they were as follows:
• Systematic reviews: where relevant literature had been identified by means of structured search of bibliographic and other databases, where transparent methodological criteria were used to exclude papers that did not meet an explicit methodological benchmark, and which presented rigorous conclusions about outcomes.
• Narrative reviews: where relevant literature had been purposively sampled from a field of research; where theoretical or topical criteria were used to include papers on the grounds of type, relevance and perceived significance; with the aim of summarising, discussing and critiquing conclusions.
• Qualitative meta-syntheses or meta-ethnographies, where relevant literature was identified by means of a structured search of bibliographic and other databases, where transparent methods had been used to draw together theoretical products, with the aim of elaborating and extending theory.
And were excluded if they were as follows:
• Secondary analyses (including qualitative meta-syntheses or meta-ethnographies) of existing data-sets for the purposes of presenting cumulative outcomes from personal research programmes.
• Secondary analyses (including qualitative meta-syntheses or meta-ethnographies) of existing data-sets for the purposes of presenting integrative outcomes from different research programmes.
• Discussions of literature included in contributions to theory building or critique.
• Summaries of literature for the purposes of information or commentary.
• Editorial discussions that argue the case for a field of research or a course of action.
Where an abstract stated it was a review, but there was no supporting evidence in the main paper, such as details of databases searched or criteria for selection of papers (either on methodological or theoretical grounds), the paper was excluded.