''How-to'': scoping review?

被引:3
作者
Pollock, Danielle [1 ]
Evans, Catrin [2 ]
Jia, Romy Menghao [3 ]
Alexander, Lyndsay [4 ,5 ]
Pieper, Dawid [6 ,7 ]
de Moraes, Erica Brandao [8 ,9 ]
Peters, Micah D. J. [10 ]
Tricco, Andrea C. [11 ,12 ,13 ]
Khalil, Hanan [14 ]
Godfrey, Christina M. [13 ]
Saran, Ashrita [15 ]
Campbell, Fiona [16 ]
Munn, Zachary [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Adelaide, Sch Publ Hlth, HESRI, Level 4,50 Rundle Mall, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
[2] Univ Nottingham, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Nottingham Ctr Evidence Based Healthcare, Nottingham, England
[3] Univ Adelaide, Sch Publ Hlth, JBI, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[4] Robert Gordon Univ, Sch Hlth Sci, Aberdeen, Scotland
[5] Robert Gordon Univ, Scottish Ctr Evidence Based Multiprofess Practice, JBI Ctr Excellence, Aberdeen, Scotland
[6] Inst Hlth Serv & Hlth Syst Res, Brandenburg Med Sch Theodor Fontane, Fac Hlth Sci Brandenburg, Brandenburg, Germany
[7] Brandenburg Med Sch Theodor Fontane, Ctr Hlth Serv Res, Brandenburg, Germany
[8] Fed Fluminense Univ, Sch Nursing, Dept Nursing Fundamentals & Adm, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
[9] Univ Sao Paulo, JBI Ctr Excellence, Brazilian Ctr Evidence Based Healthcare, Sao Paulo, Brazil
[10] Univ South Australia, Clin & Hlth Sci, Rosemary Bryant AO Res Ctr, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[11] St Michaels Hosp, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Inst, Knowledge Translat Program, Toronto, ON, Canada
[12] Univ Toronto, Dalla Lana Sch Publ Hlth, Div Epidemiol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[13] Queens Univ, Sch Nursing, Queens Collaborat Hlth Care Qual JBI Ctr Excellen, Kingston, ON, Canada
[14] La Trobe Univ, Sch Psychol & Publ Hlth, Dept Publ Hlth, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[15] Global Dev Network, Evaluat & Evidence Synth, Delhi, India
[16] Newcastle Univ, Populat Hlth Sci Inst, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne & Wear, England
基金
澳大利亚国家健康与医学研究理事会;
关键词
Scoping reviews; Evidence synthesis; Evidence-based health care; Knowledge synthesis; Mapping reviews; Evidence and gap maps; Research methodology; GUIDANCE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111572
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Objective: Scoping reviews are a type of evidence synthesis that aims to identify and map the breadth of evidence available on a particular topic, field, concept, or issue, within or across a defined context or contexts. Scoping reviews can contribute to clinical practice guideline development, policy making, reduce research waste by eliminating duplication of research effort, and be a precursor to a systematic review or inform further primary research. This article aims to provide a brief introduction of how to conduct and report scoping reviews. Study Design and Setting: We will discuss the role and value of scoping reviews within the evidence synthesis ecosystem, the differences and similarities between these reviews and other types of evidence syntheses such as systematic reviews, mapping reviews, evidence and gap maps, and overviews, and how to overcome common challenges often associated in the conduct, reporting, and dissemination of scoping reviews. Results: Scoping reviews have a role in the evidence ecosystem; however, we need to acknowledge their challenges. Conclusion: Scoping reviews are a popular form of evidence synthesis, and further research is needed to provide clarity of current methodological challenges. (c) 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] Large scoping reviews: managing volume and potential chaos in a pool of evidence sources
    Alexander, Lyndsay
    Cooper, Kay
    Peters, Micah D. J.
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    Khalil, Hanan
    Evans, Catrin
    Munn, Zachary
    Pieper, Dawid
    Godfrey, Christina M.
    McInerney, Patricia
    Pollock, Danielle
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2024, 170
  • [2] The web-based "Right Review"tool asks reviewers simple questions to suggest methods from 41 knowledge synthesis methods
    Amog, Krystle
    Pham, Ba
    Courvoisier, Melissa
    Mak, Megan
    Booth, Andrew
    Godfrey, Christina
    Hwee, Jeremiah
    Straus, Sharon E.
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2022, 147 : 42 - 51
  • [3] Campbell F, 2023, SYST REV-LONDON, V12, DOI 10.1186/s13643-023-02178-5
  • [4] An international modified Delphi process supported updating the web-based "right review" tool
    Clyne, Barbara
    Sharp, Melissa K.
    Neill, Michelle O'
    Pollock, Danielle
    Lynch, Rosarie
    Amog, Krystle
    Ryan, Mairin
    Smith, Susan M.
    Mahtani, Kamal
    Booth, Andrew
    Godfrey, Christina
    Munn, Zachary
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2024, 170
  • [5] Reporting and conducting patient journey mapping research in healthcare: A scoping review
    Davies, Ellen L.
    Bulto, Lemma N.
    Walsh, Alison
    Pollock, Danielle
    Langton, Vikki M.
    Laing, Robert E.
    Graham, Amy
    Arnold-Chamney, Melissa
    Kelly, Janet
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2023, 79 (01) : 83 - 100
  • [6] The role of scoping reviews in reducing research waste
    Khalil, Hanan
    Peters, Micah D. J.
    McInerney, Patricia A.
    Godfrey, Christina M.
    Alexander, Lyndsay
    Evans, Catrin
    Pieper, Dawid
    Moraes, Erica B.
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    Munn, Zachary
    Pollock, Danielle
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2022, 152 : 30 - 35
  • [7] Differentiating between mapping reviews and scoping reviews in the evidence synthesis ecosystem
    Khalil, Hanan
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2022, 149 : 175 - 182
  • [8] Conducting high quality scoping reviews-challenges and solutions
    Khalil, Hanan
    Peters, Micah DJ.
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    Pollock, Danielle
    Alexander, Lyndsay
    McInerney, Patricia
    Godfrey, Christina M.
    Munn, Zachary
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2021, 130 : 156 - 160
  • [9] The Pandora's Box of Evidence Synthesis and the case for a living Evidence Synthesis Taxonomy
    Munn, Zachary
    Pollock, Danielle
    Barker, Timothy Hugh
    Stone, Jennifer
    Stern, Cindy
    Aromataris, Edoardo
    Schuenemann, Holger J.
    Clyne, Barbara
    Khalil, Hanan
    Mustafa, Reem A.
    Godfrey, Christina
    Booth, Andrew
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    Pearson, Alan
    [J]. BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE, 2023, 28 (03) : 148 - 150
  • [10] What are scoping reviews? Providing a formal definition of scoping reviews as a type of evidence synthesis
    Munn, Zachary
    Pollock, Danielle
    Khalil, Hanan
    Alexander, Lyndsay
    Mclnerney, Patricia
    Godfrey, Christina M.
    Peters, Micah
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    [J]. JBI EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS, 2022, 20 (04) : 950 - 952