ArticleBMJ open2026
Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in health services: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) represents a major milestone in understanding functioning and disability and is widely used in clinical practice, management and health research. Despite its relevance, implementation of the ICF remains inconsistent across health services and care settings. Evidence on barriers and facilitators to implementation remains fragmented, limiting the development of effective, context-sensitive implementation strategies. This scoping review aims to map barriers and facilitators influencing ICF implementation in health services and to identify implementation strategies reported in the literature. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review protocol will follow the methodological recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods primary studies describing the implementation of the ICF in health services will be included with no language restrictions, published since 2001. Searches will be conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, LILACS, SciELO and PEDro databases. Studies will be selected in two stages by two independent reviewers using the Rayyan platform. Disagreements will be resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer. Data will be extracted using a standardised form. Barriers and facilitators will be mapped and categorised according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), enabling a theory-informed synthesis of implementation determinants across settings. Findings will be summarised using descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis, including implementation contexts, strategies, barriers and facilitators. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required because this review will use data from publicly available published studies and will not involve human participants. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication, conference presentation and knowledge translation activities targeting researchers, healthcare professionals, service managers and policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VRQPD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.