Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

PRISMA flow diagram of included and excluded screening process.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Summary data abstraction table.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Research location of included studies in order of quantity.

Multiple papers from the same study counted as having a single location unless reporting results from different locations.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Year of publication for included papers in chronological order with corresponding study IDs.

Multiple papers from the same study were included separately due to differing publication dates.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Methods of included papers, in order of quantity.

Multiple papers from the same study were counted as having a single study methods. Three companion papers were not counted in the ‘total quantity’ column. Many papers used multiple methods, each counted separately in the ‘quantity’ column.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Positive feedback in included studies in order of quantity.

Multiple papers from the same study were counted as having a single type of feedback.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Feedback recipients of positive feedback in included studies in order of quantity.

Multiple papers from the same study were counted as a single feedback recipient.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Feedback settings of positive feedback delivery in included studies in order of quantity.

Multiple papers from the same study were counted separately only if the setting differed between papers.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Table 8.

Outcome domains and outcome measures used in included studies.

More »

Table 8 Expand

Table 9.

Helpful outcomes identified in included studies, arranged by higher-level category and sub-category.

Multiple papers from the same study were counted separately only if reporting different outcomes. Some outcomes were described ambiguously in their original papers and therefore included in, but not expanded on, in the table.

More »

Table 9 Expand

Table 10.

Undesirable changes for healthcare staff identified in included studies.

More »

Table 10 Expand

Table 11.

Mechanisms identified as cause of change in included studies.

More »

Table 11 Expand

Table 12.

Factors enhancing the effect of positive feedback in included studies.

More »

Table 12 Expand

Table 13.

Factors hindering the effect of positive feedback in included studies.

More »

Table 13 Expand