Table 4 Definitions, frameworks and commonly measured constructs in systematic reviews on feasibility of healthcare interventions (n = 65)
Frameworks (used in N = 5 reviews) | N (%) |
|---|---|
• Bowen et al., (2009) Feasibility studies should address eight general areas including acceptability, demand, implementation, practicality, adaptation, integration, expansion and limited efficacy testing. | 3 (60) |
• Bird et al., (2014). The Structured Assessment of Feasibility (SAFE) Feasibility of complex interventions within mental health services are influenced by 16 factors such as staff training, intervention complexity, time, supervision and adverse events | 1 (20) |
• Joanna Briggs Institute Measure of feasibility, appropriateness, meaningfulness and effectiveness (FAME) | 1 (20) |
Commonly measured components | |
• Dropouts/attrition | 9 (14) |
• Adherence/compliance | 22 (34) |
• Completion | 11 (17) |
• Recruitment | 13 (20) |
• Cost-benefit/economic feasibility | 7 (11) |
• Adverse events/side-effects | 8 (12) |
• Acceptability | 10 (15) |
• Perceptions of users (satisfaction, ease of use, perceived enjoyment) | 15 (23) |
• Other (including but not limited to context-specific and operational issues, intervention practicality/acceptability/integrity, training, equipment, time, knowledge, contraindications) | 25 (38) |