Skip to main content

Table 2 Overview of the Reviews Included

From: Review of social networks of professionals in healthcare settings—where are we and what else is needed?

Review

Topic

No. of studies

Top three countries reviewed,

N (%)

Data collection

Study design

No. of participants

(range)

primary data

Secondary data

primary & secondary data

experimental design

cross-sectional

cohort

Longitudinal

1. Glegg et al. (2019)

Networks and

knowledge translation

27 *

USA, 8(29.6 %);

Italy, 8(29.6 %);

Canada,

4(14.8 %)

19

2

0

0

19

0

2

13~784

2. DuGoff et al. (2018)

Patient-sharing network using administrative data

49

USA, 37(75.5 %);

Australia,

6(12.2 %);

Italy, 3(6.1 %)

0

49

0

0

39

6

4

 N/A

3. Brunson et al. (2018)

Applications of network analysis to health care data

189 †

N/A

0

189

0

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

4. Sabot et al. (2017)

Professional advice and performance among provider

6

USA, 5(83.3 %);

Australia, 1(16.7 %)

5

0

1

1

5

0

0

21~150+

5. Poghosyan et al. (2016)

Health care team networks and their antecedents or consequences

25

USA, 25(100 %)

15

5

5

 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

25~68,288

6. Mitchell et al. (2016)

Social-professional networks in long-term care settings with people with dementia

4‡

Netherlands,

3(75.0 %);

Canada, 1(25.0 %)

4

0

0

0

4

0

0

93~380+

7. Bae et al. (2015)

Social networks and its relationships to care process and patient outcomes

28**

USA, 14(50.0 %);

Australia 4(14.3 %);

Netherlands,

3(10.7 %)

21

5

2

0

22

0

3

5~61,461

8. Benton et al. (2015)

Thematic analysis of nurse-related social network

43

USA, 21(48.8 %);

Canada, 4(9.3 %)

33

9

1

2

32

 N/A

5

10~1999

9. Tasselli et al. (2014)

Antecedents of health care professionals’ social networks and their consequences

85

USA, 36(42.4 %);

UK, 12(14.1 %);

Italy, 10(11.8 %)

78

5

2

 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

10. Cunningham et al. (2012)

Professional networks to improve quality and safety

26

USA, 13(50 %);

Australia, 4(15.4 %);

Canada, 3(11.5 %)

20

2

4

 N/A

5

N/A

N/A

21~520

11. Chambers et al. (2012)

SNA to support the implementation of change

52††

USA, 25(48.1 %);

Netherlands,

6(11.5 %)

48

2

2

1

47

 N/A

N/A

N/A

12. Dunn et al. (2011)

Validating small networks in healthcare organisations

3

USA, 2(66.7 %);

Australia, 1(33.3 %)

3

0

0

0

2

0

1

19~31

13. Braithwaite et al. (2010)

Network properties in healthcare

13

UK, 4(30.1 %);

USA, 3(23.1 %);

Australia, 3(23.1 %)

13

0

0

 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9~615

  1. Notes:
  2. Primary data for construction of SN: survey, interview, focus group discussions or observation;
  3. Secondary data for construction of SN: document review, document analysis, archival data, examination of secondary survey data, or administrative data (e.g., insurance claims, all-payer datasets —government claims data, private insurance claims data — or electronic medical record);
  4. Primary & secondary data: e.g., linked survey and administrative data;
  5. Experimental design: randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions
  6. N/A: not applicable or not stated
  7. *: only 21 studies’ data sets were described;
  8. †: 189 distinct studies, presented in 200 publications (138 journal articles, 52 conference presentations (papers and extended abstracts), 9 book sections, and 1 electronic preprint);
  9. ‡: another five studies focused on residents and were not included in this umbrella review;
  10. **: 28 unique studies were published in 29 articles. Another 3 study design types were: mixed methods (n = 2) and qualitative (n = 1);
  11. ††: 52 completed studies were reported in 62 publications. Another 4 study design types were not stated
Back to article page

Globalization and Health

ISSN: 1744-8603