Table 1.

Inclusion criteria for the screening process

Stage 1 screening: abstract and title
General criteria applicable to all papers
1. Language: published in English
2. Article type: original research and reviews (narrative and/or systematic). Book chapters, case studies, and student dissertations (not conference abstracts)
3. Sample: children (typically developing or not) with a reported mean age or age range between 5 and 18 years who are attending school
4. Setting: school, e.g., primary, elementary, middle, secondary, and high (not early childhood)
5. Topic: discusses physical literacy assessment
Implementation of assessment feasibility: specific criteria	Instrument reliability and/or validity: specific criteria
Any study design	Any study design relevant to instrument development or validation
Uses words relevant to whether we can use (or not) this instrument/approach in a school setting, i.e., it mentions feasibility aspects (e.g., easy/hard to use and administer, time to complete, training of assessors, space needed to conduct, and equipment needed)	Has a purposeful approach to physical literacy assessment, i.e., the approach/instrument is explicitly designed to assess physical literacy (e.g., rather than standards developed for physical education)
Mentions teachers or schools and perspectives about physical literacy assessment (e.g., enablers such as links to curriculum, barriers such as time and school infrastructure)	About physical literacy instrument validity and/or reliability
	Must be an assessment that could be administered in a school setting (i.e., not measured through laboratory methods) within physical education or another lesson
	Also interested in articles that explore validity in terms of ‘relations with other variables’, in this case, the instrument measured against age, sex, another physical literacy instrument, or a motor skill instrument
Stage 2 screening: full text
Implementation of assessment feasibility: specific criteria	Instrument reliability and/or validity: specific criteria
All above criteria in Stage 1 are met. No additional criteria	All above Stage 1 criteria are met
	Reports on a measurement method (qualitative or quantitative) relevant to assessment. If it is qualitative, the measurement approach must be specified, e.g., reference to a framework/model/approach/theory that relates to the physical literacy assessment method
	Instruments needed to assess at least three domains as listed in the Australian Physical Literacy Framework. If the instrument did not assess the physical domain, then the assessment still needed to be centred in the context of movement behavior. For instance, an assessment designed to mention social/cognitive/psychological elements during a non-sport/movement/physical activity context would be excluded. Sedentary behavior would be included if measured as part of the physical literacy assessment
	Reported information on measurement properties (quantitative assessments) or theoretical development (qualitative assessments)
	Instruments needed to be the most recent version of that instrument. Note: this is only relevant to one instrument where the second version has been revised and improved