Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 1 Document characteristics

From: Engaging policy-makers, health system managers, and policy analysts in the knowledge synthesis process: a scoping review

Document characteristics (n = 84) Count (%)
Year of publication 2005–2007 6 (7.1%)
2008–2010 16 (19.0%)
2011–2013 30 (35.7%)
2014–2016 32 (38.1%)
Geographic region Africa 4 (4.8%)
Asia 4 (4.8%)
Australia & New Zealand 11 (13.1%)
Europe 20 (23.8%)
North America 45 (53.6%)
Funding source type Industry-sponsored 2 (2.4%)
Non-sponsored 3 (3.6%)
Not reported 13 (15.5%)
Public-sponsored 66 (78.6%)
Journal discipline General & Internal Medicine 4 (4.8%)
Not applicable (reports) 6 (7.1%)
Medicine, General & Internal 6 (7.1%)
Health Policy & Services 7 (8.3%)
Public, Environmental & Occupational Health 14 (16.7%)
Other 21 (25.0%)
Health Care Sciences & Services 26 (31.0%)
Knowledge synthesis method Qualitative review 1 (1.2%)
Critical Interpretive Synthesis 1 (1.2%)
Mixed-method review 1 (1.2%)
Health Technology Assessment 1 (1.2%)
Scoping Review & Systematic Review 1 (1.2%)
Horizontal scan 1 (1.2%)
Rapid Realist Review 2 (2.4%)
Overview of Reviews 3 (3.6%)
Realist Review 5 (6.0%)
Rapid Review 10 (11.9%)
Scoping Review 12 (14.3%)
Literature review 16 (19.0%)
Systematic review 30 (35.7%)
Article type Methodology paper 3 (3.6%)
Descriptive paper 8 (9.5%)
Application paper 73 (86.9%)