Table 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria using the Participants, Intervention, Comparisons, and Outcomes (PICO) Framework [32]
| Â | Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria |
|---|---|---|
Study design | All study types and conference abstracts | Books, Commentaries, Editorials, Guidelines, Letters, News and Opinions, Reports and Reviews |
Participants | All qualified (postgraduate) healthcare professionals in clinical practice or clinical training who are involved with intravenous thrombolysis administration as a treatment for ischaemic stroke | Healthcare (undergraduate) students or professionals in training Healthcare professionals not involved with intravenous thrombolysis in the management of ischemic stroke |
Intervention | Any form of simulation training for ischaemic stroke intravenous thrombolysis administration | Other forms of teaching interventions. Training on other treatments for stroke that are not intravenous thrombolysis |
Comparisons | No interventions/no simulation training (e.g. continued postgraduate training without any forms of simulation, no change to training curriculums) | Â |
Outcomes | The primary outcome of door-to-needle time for intravenous thrombolysis administration The learner-centred secondary outcomes of improvement in stroke knowledge and/or feeling ‘safe’ in thrombolysis-related decision-making and/or self-perceived usefulness of simulation training and/or improvement in communication | Other outcomes |