This refers to the intentions or motives behind people’s decisions to participate in interventions, which may have differential effects on treatment results (eg, ‘Well-being enhancement motive’ or ‘Distress reduction motive’.26 None of the interventions were found to specifically assess the intentions of the participants. Intention is mentioned only once38 (‘why one is practicing’), in reference to the work of Shapiro et al on the mechanisms of action of mindfulness.22

Although most of the interventions involve self-selected participants, many of the authors point out that motivation and commitment is required to follow the treatment and carry out the activities required in the programmes. Adherence to treatment is an obstacle to completing the intervention.

Three citations refer to the institutional commitment to wellness programmes for PCPs personnel.

In this category, motivation is considered to be a component of eudaimonic well-being and is assessed as an indicator of the outcome of the intervention. Most of the mentions of engagement and empowerment belong to this category and refer mainly to work-related engagement.

In two cases, improvements in empathy and motivation of PCPs personnel are mentioned: (1) for promoting patient participation in care and (2) listening to others and understanding the other’s experience.

Most mentions of intention refer to ‘turnover intention’ or ‘intention to leave (the organisation)’ and are assessed as indicators of the outcome of the interventions.

Three quotes refer to personal agency as an element to take into account during the interventions, in relation to (1) the ability to influence the organisational environment (eg, ‘…we speculate that improving job self-efficacy might have required a specific focus of coaching to help coachees identify and accept where they do and do not have agency in reconfiguring their jobs’28; (2) ‘involvement in decision making and defining roles and expectations’23 or (3) ‘agency and control over goal striving’.28