Skip to main content

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%)