Knowledge Management Processes and Tools in Brazilian Municipal Public Education: Systematic Literature Review Dataset (PRISMA/PICOC, 2015–2025)

Dataset overview This deposit contains the complete search, screening, and selection record of a systematic literature review conducted to answer the question: “Which knowledge management (KM) processes and tools, with an emphasis on knowledge storage and sharing, are used in the management of Brazilian municipal public education?” The review follows the PRISMA 2020 statement (Page et al., 2021) for reporting and the PICOC framework (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Context) for structuring eligibility criteria. It underpins the empirical article “Knowledge Management in Municipal Education Departments: An Analysis of Tools of the Central Enrollment Unit”, and is released so that the search, screening, and selection stages can be independently audited and reproduced. 2. Files in this deposit articles.xls — Bibliographic export of the full search corpus generated by the Parsif.al platform (449 records, 11 columns). One row per retrieved record. Columns: title; author; journal; year; source (database of origin); publisher; issn; language; note (DOI or access URL, when available); selection_criteria (reason recorded at screening); status (screening decision in Parsif.al). 3. Review protocol Research question: Which KM processes and tools, with an emphasis on knowledge storage and sharing, are used in the management of Brazilian municipal public education? Reporting guideline: PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). Question-structuring framework: PICOC — Population: municipal departments of education and public education management bodies; Intervention: KM processes and tools, with an emphasis on knowledge storage and sharing; Comparison: not applicable (no comparator required); Outcome: identification and characterization of the KM processes and tools reported; Context: public education management, with priority given to the Brazilian municipal setting. Review type: qualitative systematic literature review; no meta-analysis was performed. The protocol was not prospectively registered in PROSPERO. 4. Search strategy Databases searched: CAPES Periódicos (Portal de Periódicos CAPES), Dimensions, SciELO, Scopus, and Web of Science. Publication window: January 2015 to January 2025. Search strings (title, abstract, and keyword fields): Portuguese: (“Gestão do Conhecimento” AND “Gestão Pública da Educação”) English: (“Knowledge Management” AND “Public Education Management”) Supporting tool: Parsif.al (https://parsif.al), a web-based platform for systematic review management, used to import the exports of the five databases, remove duplicates, apply the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and record each screening decision. Records retrieved by database, as present in articles.xls: Dimensions, 353; Scopus, 56; CAPES Periódicos, 37; Web of Science, 3; SciELO, 0 (the SciELO query returned no records meeting the string and window criteria). Total: 449. No language restriction was applied at the search stage; no grey-literature source, citation chasing, or manual reference-list screening was used. 5. Eligibility criteria Inclusion: (i) articles published in scientific peer-reviewed journals; (ii) published between 2015 and 2025; (iii) containing the terms “Gestão do Conhecimento” or “Knowledge Management” in the title, abstract, or keywords; (iv) with a direct relationship to public education management, prioritizing the municipal level. Exclusion: (i) conference proceedings papers; (ii) abstracts and extended abstracts; (iii) studies with no relationship to the municipal or public education management context; (iv) articles addressing COVID-19 with no adherence to the review scope; (v) duplicate records across databases. 6. Selection flow (PRISMA 2020) Records identified through database searching: 449. Records removed before screening (duplicates and records ineligible on formal grounds): 39. Records screened by title and abstract: 410. Records excluded at title-and-abstract screening: 404. Reports sought for full-text assessment: 6. Studies included in the final qualitative synthesis: 1 study met the Brazilian municipal scope in the strict sense; 7 studies were retained for the broader comparative discussion of KM in public education institutions. Transparency note: the count of studies retained for comparative discussion (7) exceeds the number of reports assessed in full text (6) because one additional study identified during full-text assessment was included by consensus for comparative purposes. Users reproducing the counts should read the two figures as, respectively, the strict-scope yield and the discussion corpus. 7. Studies retained for the comparative synthesis Year Author(s) Summary of the study 2015 Feijoo et al. Examines barriers to employee portals in the Spanish public sector; highlights the lack of resources and difficulties of use. 2019 Adeinat & Abdulfatah Analyzes the influence of organizational culture on KM processes in public universities. 2019 Ngoc-Tan & Gregar Studies the impact of KM on the performance of higher education institutions in Vietnam; identifies gaps in knowledge sharing. 2020 Macedo Morais et al. Assesses management effectiveness in higher education institutions in Minas Gerais, Brazil, using the Baldrige Model. 2021 Gad & Yousif Tests a KM model in the United Arab Emirates; identifies organizational culture as the highest-impact factor. 2022 Galgotia & Lakshmi Comparative study of public and private universities in India on tools supporting KM. 2025 Abdulmuhsin et al. Analyzes how workplace friendships influence KM in Islamic public universities. 8. Main conclusions of the review Gap: there is a shortage of official knowledge-recording mechanisms in the Brazilian public education sector, and the retrieved literature contains no explicit reference to processes and tools dedicated to knowledge storage and sharing at the municipal level. Informality: there is a high level of dependence on non-institutional tools — messaging applications such as WhatsApp, personal repositories, and individually maintained records — arising from the inefficiency or absence of unified institutional portals. Critical factors: leadership and organizational culture are decisive for the success or failure of knowledge retention, a finding that is consistent across all national contexts represented in the corpus. 9. Reproducibility notes To reproduce the search, run each string verbatim in the five databases listed in Section 4, restricting the publication window to 2015–2025 and the search fields to title, abstract, and keywords, then import the exports into a Parsif.al project and apply the criteria in Section 5. Because database indexing is continuously updated, a replication performed after the original search date will not return an identical record count; the file articles.xls preserves the corpus exactly as retrieved. The screening decisions recorded in the status and selection_criteria columns of articles.xls are the primary evidence for the flow reported in Section 6 and can be recounted directly from the file. No statistical analysis, code, or software beyond Parsif.al and a spreadsheet application is required to reproduce the results reported here. 10. Data-quality and provenance notes The export in articles.xls reflects the state of the Parsif.al project at the moment of export (5 September 2025). In this snapshot 7 records carry an explicit “Rejected” status with the recorded reason “Artigos não relacionados a educação pública municipal” (articles unrelated to municipal public education), and the remaining 442 records remain flagged as “Unclassified”. Users should therefore read this file as the retrieved corpus plus the decision fields as saved at export time, not as the closed screening ledger; the consolidated counts of the screening process are those reported in Section 6. The year field ranges from 2013 to 2025 because some databases return records whose indexed publication year falls outside the requested window; such records were removed during screening. The publisher, issn, and language fields are sparsely populated, as these metadata are not supplied consistently by all five databases. Records are stored in the original language of the source metadata (Portuguese, English, and Spanish). 11. Licence, citation, and related publication This dataset is released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY 4.0). Reuse and redistribution are permitted provided that the creators are credited. Related publication: Tenório, N., Santos, B., & Fleig Dal Forno, L. Knowledge Management in Municipal Education Departments: An Analysis of Tools of the Central Enrollment Unit. The dataset documents the literature review reported in Section 3.2 of that article. Full bibliographic details for every record, including DOIs and access URLs where available, are contained in articles.xls. Contact: correspondence regarding this dataset should be addressed to the corresponding author of the related publication.