Table 1 Study details, characteristics, and results extraction instrument
From: Social science research contributions to antimicrobial resistance: protocol for a scoping review
Scoping review title: | Social science research contributions to antimicrobial resistance: a scoping review |
Review objective/s: | To identify, categorise, summarize, synthesize and map out existing knowledge, literature and evidence on AMR from social sciences research |
Review question/s: | • What evidence or studies are available that address social, cultural, organizational, political or economic dimensions of AMR? • What empirical, conceptual and/or theoretical elements constitute this body of literature? • What knowledge and research gaps can be identified? |
Concepts (what*): | AMR, Social Sciences |
Population (for whom*): | Humans (excluding studies conducted in animals and plants) |
Core concept: | Social science research contributions to AMR |
Language: | English |
Date of publication: | January 1998–September 2019 |
Data extraction: | Name (i.e., person extracting data) |
Date | |
Publication details | |
Author(s): | |
Title: | |
Type of publication/source (e.g. commentary/peer-reviewed journal) | |
Year and place of publication: | |
Aim(s)/research question(s): | |
Type of study and/or methodological approach (including data collection methods and analytical approach, if available) | |
Academic discipline/disciplinary approach (e.g. sociology, anthropology, economics): | |
Location (where*) (e.g. country/province; rural/urban; country income level): | |
Context (if applicable) (e.g. patients’ home, primary/secondary/tertiary healthcare, pharmacies/ drug shops, farms, local/national/international policy): | |
Sample size (if applicable): | |
Year(s) of data collection: | |
Other results extracted from study or document content | |
Conceptual/theoretical framework or approach: | |
Domains addressed/focus of study (e.g., prescribing, consuming or dispensing practices, social interactions including user—prescriber and/or professional—institutional interactions, formal/informal aspects, stockholders, contextual factors, drivers, costs and impacts, socio-cultural meanings, images and stigma, intervention development or evaluation, etc.); | |
Key findings that relate to the scoping review question(s) (*what result): | |
Comments on gaps, inconsistencies, biases and unmet needs in AMR research: | |
Reported AMR-related academic activities (e.g., research and teaching programs, fellowships, funded projects; NGOs and networks; program and policy development, campaigns, advocacy, and knowledge exchange activities, regulation and delivery on AMR, etc.): | |
Other emerging information or themes (*what else): | |