Table 2 Inclusion, exclusion criteria

– Last 15 years (2005–2020)

– Written in English

– Clear methods involving data collection (secondary or primary) (not literature reviews or perspectives), articles where the tool was developed, used, or validated or both

– Includes results for rural or underserviced locations, not for a generic geographical context

– Studies in regional/non-metropolitan/resource-limited, as long as they provide rural/underserviced definition and the context

– Rural or underserved is defined by its distance/geography and limited workforce

– Studies that used other terms such as remote, under-serviced, poor-resource and resource-limited

– Include differentiated results for rural, whether urban is included in the study or not

– Aligns with definition of framework, tool or resource (Box 1)

– About improving/enhancing health system components using health systems thinking

– Before last 15 years

– Non-English

– No clear methods involving data collection

– No separate results for rural locations

– Documents that include descriptive or narrative literature alone, or reports with recommendations that do not fit concept of framework, tool or resource, systems components or system thinking

– Conceptual frameworks that are used as reference or as a method to guide the data collection/analysis rather than for planning and decision-making about rural health systems

– Government reviews that arrive at principles and actions for specific topics at a point in time and do not specifically guide ongoing dynamic action on “how to” respond to systems issues in rural communities. These tend to focus on particular events, policies, factors or causalities