Thanks all for the time taken to reply to my question.
Our stabilized approach criteria seem to be copy & paste of FCTM. The +/- 1 dot seem just to be to pass the "500 continue" call whereas the stabilized definition is more along the lines of "on the correct vertical path", which is more vague. In the particular case above the V/S profile matched the ILS profile, however we were low on the last altitude vs. DME check but correcting so the actual ROD was benign.. if I recall correctly set to 700 fpm. The end result was an uneventful landing in the TDZ.
Btw, what is your take on winding down the V/S thumbwheel 0,5 nm before the actual descent point on a V/S NPA? That was the idea of one TRI, which has the advantage of being on profile as the descent is established. Another TRI was of the opinion it was a bust of platform altitude, instead we have to "chase" the profile with slightly higher ROD initially.