Skip to content
Review Open access

Application of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability in healthcare interventions: a scoping review and proposed reporting checklist

Sep 2026 · BMC Health Services Research · Vol 26 · 0 citations · 27 references
Medicine

TL;DR

Despite widespread adoption, application of the TFA remains variable and reporting does not always provide sufficient detail to support appraisal and comparison, which limits the ability to compare acceptability across studies, identify key drivers, or use findings to inform intervention development and implementation.

Abstract

The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) assesses how interventions are perceived by those who deliver and receive them. However, there has been no systematic mapping of how the framework is conceptualised, operationalised, and reported in healthcare intervention research. To examine how the TFA is used to assess acceptability in healthcare intervention research. A scoping review was conducted using JBI methodology and reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR. Searches were undertaken across MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and ISRCTN from 2017 to July 2025. Empirical studies, trial registrations, and published protocols were included if they applied the TFA to assess the acceptability of patient-facing healthcare interventions. Data were extracted and synthesised using descriptive and narrative approaches. Use of the TFA has increased over time and spans diverse clinical contexts. When findings were aggregated across source types, acceptability was most commonly assessed, or planned to be assessed, using questionnaires and was typically positioned as a post-intervention outcome. Assessments were predominantly conducted with patients or service users at a single time point. Sensitivity analysis restricted to empirical studies showed that assessment was predominantly qualitative and interview-based, while outcome positioning and post-intervention timing remained common. Non-specification of TFA constructs was concentrated among trial registrations. In the overall sample, the TFA most frequently informed data collection, whereas among empirical studies it was most often applied during analysis, reporting and interpretation. Despite widespread adoption, application of the TFA remains variable and reporting does not always provide sufficient detail to support appraisal and comparison. This limits the ability to compare acceptability across studies, identify key drivers, or use findings to inform intervention development and implementation. Greater transparency in how acceptability is conceptualised, assessed and reported may enhance the utility of the TFA. A reporting checklist may support more consistent interpretation, clearer appraisal of framework use, and improved comparability across studies. Not applicable.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Review Open access Oct 2026

A Scoping Review of Health Literacy Measurement in U.S. Interventions: Trends, Tools, and Gaps

Background: Health literacy is a critical determinant of health outcomes, yet considerable variability exists in how it is measured across intervention studies. This scoping review article systematically mapped health literacy measurement tools and implementation reporting practices in United States-based interventions...

Yun-Lin Zhou, Marissa Mathew, M. Patterson et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

Scoping Review on the Evidence Assessment of Interventions: A Protocol.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE The assessment of evidence in health research for interventions has traditionally relied on hierarchical models that prioritize randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses. Over time, alternative models have evolved, reshaping and rebalancing sources of evidence and giving more weight to ext...

Sonja N. Kralj, J. Adams, D. Moher et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

Methods used to design audit and feedback interventions to change clinical practice: a scoping review

Variability was identified in the theoretical models used to guide intervention design, which may be applied individually or in combination, and greater methodological rigour and transparency in study reporting would be needed to improve replicability.

Raquel Gallardo-Aviles, Ma Angeles García-Lirola, M. C. Gonzalez-Lopez et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Oct 2026

Assessing the Value of Digital Health Interventions: A Systematic Review of Evaluation Frameworks and Approaches, Key Dimensions and Criteria.

OBJECTIVES Digital Health Interventions (DHIs) are systematically developed digital solutions that address key healthcare challenges such as accessibility, efficiency, and quality of care. These interventions optimize healthcare processes and benefit multiple stakeholders. Despite their increasing significance, the eva...

A. Fischer, A. Mühlbacher · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

Patient Safety in Primary Health Care: A Scoping Review of Characteristics, Thematic Dimensions, and Gaps in the Literature

Patient safety in primary health care (PHC) is a multidimensional and systemic phenomenon, although the literature retrieved under the specified search and eligibility criteria was heterogeneous and unevenly distributed across geographic contexts. This scoping review aimed to map, analyze, and synthesize how patient sa...

Luciano Garcia Lourenção, Luciano Silveira Pacheco de Medeiros, Daiani Modernel Xavier et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Frameworks for Measuring Factors Associated With Healthcare Providers' Performance: A Scoping Review.

RATIONALE Healthcare providers are influenced by several factors that affect their performance. However, no such work has been presented to organise or clarify this growing body of literature. AIM AND OBJECTIVES This study aimed to identify frameworks for measuring factors affecting healthcare providers' performance....

Khalid Alkhurayji, Saja A. Alrayes, Arwa Alumran · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.