Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies in scoping review

From: Learning about stress from building, drilling and flying: a scoping review on team performance and stress in non-medical fields

Study Study design [32] Discipline Sample size Study location Quality of evidence [31]
Gardner, 2012 [33] Non-comparative study – multi method Accounting & consultancy Study 1: 78 teams
Study 2: 6 teams
United States of America Fair
Savelsbergh et al., 2012 [34] Non-comparative study Building & construction 38 teams The Netherlands Good
Gervits et al., 2016 [35] Non-comparative study – mixed methods Student teams 10 teams United States of America Fair
Long et al., 2014 [36] Non-comparative study Student teams 55 teams China Poor
Bourgeon et al., 2013 [37] Non-comparative study – multi method Aviation 10 teams France Poor
Ellis et al., 2011 [38] Cluster-RCT Student teams 54 teams United States of America Fair
Kaplan et al., 2013 [39] Non-comparative study – multi-method Nuclear engineering 21 teams United States of America Fair
Pearsall et al., 2009 [40] Cluster-RCT Student teams 83 teams United States of America Fair
Price et al., 2017 [41] Cross-sectional study Army 18 teams United States of America Poor
Stachowski et al., 2009 [42] Non-comparative study – multi-method Nuclear engineering 14 teams United States of America Fair
Maruping et al., 2015 [43] Non-comparative study Software firm 111 teams United States of America Fair
Espevik et al., 2013 [44] Non-comparative study Navy Not applicable Norway Poor
Espevik et al., 2011 [45] Non-RCT Navy 23 teams Norway Good
Xu et al., 2018 [46] Before-and-after or interrupted time series Student teams 36 teams United States of America Good
Wang et al., 2020 [47] Non-comparative study – multi method Nuclear engineering Study 1: 18 individuals
Study 2: 5 teams
China Good