“…Although an integrative review should speak to the level of evidence, in this study it was difficult to select only studies with higher levels of evidence because elements to construct definitions were needed. Therefore, from a total of 1,927 articles identified in the databases, 31 were considered relevant to answering the research question (Ablove, ; Abrams et al., ; Arianyagam, Arianyagam, & Rashid, ; J. Buchanan, & M. Beckmann, ; Chang, ; Chang, Hsieh, & Yang, ; Chapple & Osman, ; Gursoy et al., ; Hansen, Soreid, Darland, & Nilsen, ; Haylen et al., ; Hernandez et al., ; Huang et al., ; Johansson & Christensson, ; Justo, Schwartz, Dvorkin, Gringauz, & Groutz, ; Madersbacher et al., ; Mago et al., ; Malik, Cohn, & Bales, ; Maserejian et al., ; Mulder et al., ; Mulder et al., ; Negro & Muir, ; Nevo, Mano, Livne, Sivan, & Ben‐Meir, ; Oelke, Speakman, Desgrandchamps, & Mamoulaks, ; Osman et al., ; Saaby & Lose, ; Shimoni, Fruger, & Froom, ; Silveira et al., ; Wilson, ). Several additional sources were included in this integrative review: an English language dictionary (Deuter, Bradbery, & Turnbull, ), a publication by the ICS (Abrams et al., ), and a book published by ICS in 2013 (Staskin et al., ).…”