Skip to main content

Table 2 Results from the scoping review including a summary of the system employed and criteria used in equivalency evaluation

From: Systems that evaluate international equivalency in health-related professions: a scoping review with a focus on Canada

Paper #

Discipline referenced

Systems employed*

Equivalency criteria**

1. Kwan et al., 2019 [13]

Nursing

3

1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 13, 14, 23

2. Mercier et al., 2021 [14]

Nursing

Specific type was not reported

11, 13, 19, 22

3. Gauthier et al., 2002[15]

Psychology

Specific type was not reported

3, 11, 14, 21, 24,

4. Rodolfa et al., 2005[16]

Psychology

4

3, 13, 17, 21, 24,

5. Hamanaka et al., 2021[17]

Engineering

3

2, 3, 6, 11, 13, 14, 21

6. Austin et al., 2007[18]

Pharmacy

4

1, 3, 4, 8, 9, 13, 20, 22, 23,

7. Augustine et al., 2015 [19]^

Accounting, Engineering and Medicine to name 3/38 referenced

n/a—mostly referenced systems, but were not specific

13, 22

  1. *Where 1 = paper; 2 = electronic; 3 = combination of both paper and electronic; 4) competency-based; 5 = machine-learning system
  2. **The numbers associated with the equivalency criteria legend are listed in Table 3
  3. ^This study focused on cross border equivalency between Canadian provinces primarily