Scoping reviews [also known as mapping reviews] are exploratory research projects that systematically map the literature on a topic by identifying key concepts, theories and sources of evidence that inform practice in the field.
Main objectives of scoping reviews are to identify gaps in the current research and highlight areas that require further inquiry. They aim to assess the potential size and scope of available research literature [often including ongoing research] and the current level of synthesis available.
Scoping reviews are sometimes used as a preliminary research to justify further investigation, time, and resources; however, they can also be standalone projects, especially where the research topic is complex or has not been reviewed comprehensively in the past.
They share several characteristics with systematic reviews by way of being systematic, transparent, and replicable [for more information on systematic reviews seeUnderstanding review types: systematic reviews and meta-analyses].
There are 5 main steps required to successfully complete a scoping review:
- Identify What is the research question[s] - what domain needs to be explored?
- Find locate relevant studies - electronic databases, reference lists, websites, conference proceedings, clinical trials, etc.
- Select Choose studies that are relevant to the question[s] use predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria.
- Extract/chart organize the data from relevant studies selected.
- Collate Summarize and report the results.
Scoping reviews can be completed rapidly and can use qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods approaches. The aim of evidence gathering in a scoping review is to gather as much as possible and map the results.
Analyses and syntheses are part of every scoping review but the depth and type of analysis are different than that found in a systematic review. The results garnered from a scoping review are usually displayed in a tabular format with some narrative commentary and statistical analysis [meta-analysis] is common.
Before beginning a scoping review project, its an excellent idea to consult a librarian who can help to create a robust search strategy [including assistance with grey literature searching], inform citation management and assist with search documentation.
References
Grant MJ, Booth A. [2009]A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J. 2009; 26[2]: 91-108.
Daudt HM, van Mossel C, Scott SJ.Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team's experience with Arksey and O'Malley's framework. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013; 13:48.
Other Readings
Tricco AC et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews [PRISMA-ScR]: Checklist and Explanation. Ann
Intern Med. 2018; 169[7]:467-473. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850.
Munn Z et al. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2018;18:143.
Peters MD et al. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015; 13[3]:141-6.
Arksey H. and O'Malley L. Scoping Studies: towards a methodological framework.International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005; 8[1]:19-32.
This article was originallypart of the HSL News seriesUnderstanding review types. For more information about this series,read the series introduction.
[view original post]