Extraction form for project: The effect of volunteering on the health and wellbeing of volunteers: an umbrella review

Design Details

1. Review ID
(surname of first author and year first full report of study was published e.g. Smith 2001)
2. Review title
3. Date form completed
4. Initials of person extracting
5. Review funding source
6. Possible conflicts of interest
7. Aim of review
8. Number of databases searched
9. Names of databases searched; date ranges of databases searched
10. Date of last search
11. Number of included studies
12. Exclusion criteria for participants
(e.g age, comorbidities)
13. Exclusion criteria for volunteering
(e.g type of volunteering, for a specific organistion/purpose)
14. Exclusion criteria for study type
15. Exclusion criteria for outcome measures
16. Outcomes studied
(select all that apply)
17. Primary reported outcomes
18. Secondary reported outcomes (if applicable)
19. Number of participants included in the review
20. Review’s included study type (% of quant studies)
21. Included studies countries of publication
22. Range of included studies years of publication
23. Review’s population
(age, ethnicity, SES)
24. Social outcomes reported
25. Social outcomes not supported
(e.g cited as non-significant)
26. Physical outcomes reported
27. Physical outcomes not supported
(e.g cited as non-significant)
28. Psychological outcomes reported
29. Psychological outcomes not supported
(e.g cited as non-significant)
30. General outcomes reported
(i.e general health and wellbeing)
31. General outcomes not supported
(e.g cited as non-significant)
32. Interactions reported
(i.e between each other or demographic variables)
33. Was a meta-analysis performed?
34. Number of included studies in the meta-analysis
35. Heterogeneity
(e.g I squared)
36. Pooled estimates
37. Confidence intervals (95%)
38. Key conclusions from study authors
39. Review limitations
40. AMSTAR 2 quality appraisal rating
41. Quality appraisal tool used by review (if applicable)
42. Quality of included studies (if applicable)
43. Publication bias reported (if applicable)
44. Was correspondence required for further study information?
45. What further correspondence was required, and from whom?
46. What further study information was requested (from whom, what and when)?
47. What correspondence was received (from whom, what and when)?