Table 2 Studies excluded from the review

Agyei-Baffour et al. 2011 [75]

The paper assessed the influence of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on willingness to accept postings to rural areas among medical students. The study group did not represent HWs and thus did not meet the full inclusion criteria.

de Guzman et al. 2009 [76]

This article was a phenomenological study of motivation and attitudes of six nurses towards geriatric care. The findings and discussion lacked relevance to the review hence exclusion because they failed to meet the quality criteria based on the CASP tool.

Gambino 2010 [77]

The paper reported findings from a study of the relationships between registered nurses’ motivation for entering the profession, occupational commitment and intent to remain. It utilised a mix of students and nurses at a university medical centre hence was excluded because it did not meet the full inclusion criteria. It also failed to meet the quality criteria based on the assessment/quality appraisal tool, CASP, the findings dwelt on transformative change and were adjudged irrelevant to this review.

Helmink et al. 2012 [78]

The article reported findings from a study that examined factors explaining motivation among HWs to implement a single programme to support prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Despite having a strong theoretical and methodological background, the findings lacked credibility and relevance to the review question and objectives.

Imai et al. 2010 [79]

The article was based on a study on factors associated with motivation and hesitation of health professionals during a public crisis in Japan. It was excluded because it only considered motivation during a crisis and the findings on motivation were not credible and relevant to this review when subjected to the CASP tool.

Kamanzi and Nkosi 2011 [80]

The paper explored factors that influence the motivation levels of nurses working in a university teaching hospital. The data collection and analysis were not clearly outlined hence lacked rigour. The results were listed without any clear explanation and discussion.

Leonard and Masatu 2010 [81]

The study explored intrinsic motivation among HWs for evidence on professionalism. The findings were related to the knowledge of clinicians in relation to how they perform their duties and not motivational factors as per theoretical framework. The findings lacked credibility and were not relevant to this review.

Lopes and Delellis 2013 [82]

The study on understanding the motivations of the multi-generational physician assistant workforce used convenient sampling of conference attendees. The study lacked rigour in research methods.

Minai and Almansour 2013 [83]

The study investigated factors influencing job satisfaction and motivation of nurses in the male nurse-dominated environment which were not clearly explained. The findings were not well presented and discussed and hence lacked credibility and relevance.

Mubyazi and Njunwa 2013 [84]

Despite having a rigorous methodology, the study on perceived impact of health sector reforms on motivation of HWs and quality of care did not investigate the motivational determinants and hence failed to meet the full inclusion criteria.

Negussie 2012 [85]

The study investigated the relationship between rewards and incentives and nurses’ work motivation but was not well presented and meaningful to the study objectives. It also lacked relevance to the review question.

Serneels et al. 2007 [86]

The study aimed to understand the role of intrinsic motivation in influencing HWs’ choice to work in faith-based institutions in rural areas. The study participants were nursing and medical students. Excluded because of not meeting the full inclusion criteria (study participants were not HWs)