SynthesisPloS one2023
The impact of university STEM assets: A systematic review of the empirical evidence.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInnovation ecosystems are an important driver of regional economic growth and development. STEM assets connected to universities may play an important role in such ecosystems.
objectiveTo systematically review the literature relating to the effect of university STEM assets on regional economies and innovation ecosystems, providing a better understanding of how the impact is generated and constrained, as well as identifying any gaps in knowledge.
methodsKeyword and text word searches using the Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate), Econlit (EBSCO) and ERIC (EBSCO) were performed in July 2021 and February 2023. Papers were double screened on abstract and title, and were included if there was consensus that they fulfilled the inclusion criteria of: (i) relating to an OECD country; (ii) having been published between 1 January 2010 and 28 February 2023; and (iii) concerning the impact of STEM assets. Data extraction was undertaken for each article by a single reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Due to the heterogeneity of the study designs and outcome measures used, it was not possible to perform a quantitative synthesis of results. A narrative synthesis was subsequently undertaken.
resultsOf the 162 articles identified for detailed review, 34 were accepted as being sufficiently relevant to the study to be included for final analysis. Three important features identified were that the literature: i) is predominately concerned with supporting new businesses; ii) describes a high level of involvement with a university in providing that support; and iii studies economic impacts at local, regional and national levels. DISCUSSION: The evidence points to a gap in the literature relating to looking at the broader impact of STEM assets and any corresponding transformational, system-level effects that go beyond narrowly defined, short to medium-term outcomes. The main limitation of this review is that information on STEM assets in the non-academic literature is not captured.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.