Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application

Micah D J Peters; Casey Marnie; Heather Colquhoun; Chantelle M Garritty; Susanne Hempel; Tanya Horsley; Etienne V Langlois; Erin Lillie; Kelly K O'Brien; Ӧzge Tunçalp; Michael G Wilson; Wasifa Zarin; Andrea C Tricco

doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3

Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application

Syst Rev. 2021 Oct 8;10(1):263. doi: 10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3.

Authors

Micah D J Peters^{1

2

3}, Casey Marnie¹, Heather Colquhoun^{4

5}, Chantelle M Garritty⁶, Susanne Hempel⁷, Tanya Horsley⁸, Etienne V Langlois⁹, Erin Lillie¹⁰, Kelly K O'Brien^{5

11

12}, Ӧzge Tunçalp¹³, Michael G Wilson^{14

15

16}, Wasifa Zarin¹⁷, Andrea C Tricco^{18

19

20}

Affiliations

¹ University of South Australia, UniSA Clinical and Health Sciences, Rosemary Bryant AO Research Centre, Playford Building P4-27, City East Campus, North Terrace, Adelaide, 5000, South Australia.
² Adelaide Nursing School, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, 101 Currie St, Adelaide, 5001, South Australia.
³ The Centre for Evidence-based Practice South Australia (CEPSA): a Joanna Briggs Institute Centre of Excellence, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, 5006, Adelaide, South Australia.
⁴ Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Terrence Donnelly Health Sciences Complex, 3359 Mississauga Rd, Toronto, Ontario, L5L 1C6, Canada.
⁵ Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (RSI), University of Toronto, St. George Campus, 160-500 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1V7, Canada.
⁶ Knowledge Synthesis Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 1053 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, K1Y 4E9, Canada.
⁷ Southern California Evidence Review Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90007, USA.
⁸ Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, 774 Echo Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S 5N8, Canada.
⁹ Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (PMNCH), World Health Organisation, Avenue Appia 20, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland.
¹⁰ Sunnybrook Research Institute, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, Ontario, M4N 3M5, Canada.
¹¹ Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, St. George Campus, 160-500 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1V7, Canada.
¹² Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, St. George Campus, 155 College Street 4th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 3M6, Canada.
¹³ UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organisation, Avenue Appia 20, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland.
¹⁴ McMaster Health Forum, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.
¹⁵ Department of Health Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.
¹⁶ Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.
¹⁷ Knowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria Street, East Building, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1T8, Canada.
¹⁸ Knowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria Street, East Building, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1T8, Canada. Andrea.Tricco@unityhealth.to.
¹⁹ Epidemiology Division and Institute for Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College St, Room 500, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 3M7, Canada. Andrea.Tricco@unityhealth.to.
²⁰ Queen's Collaboration for Health Care Quality Joanna Briggs Institute Centre of Excellence, School of Nursing, Queen's University, 99 University Ave, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6, Canada. Andrea.Tricco@unityhealth.to.

Abstract

Scoping reviews are an increasingly common approach to evidence synthesis with a growing suite of methodological guidance and resources to assist review authors with their planning, conduct and reporting. The latest guidance for scoping reviews includes the JBI methodology and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Extension for Scoping Reviews. This paper provides readers with a brief update regarding ongoing work to enhance and improve the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews as well as information regarding the future steps in scoping review methods development. The purpose of this paper is to provide readers with a concise source of information regarding the difference between scoping reviews and other review types, the reasons for undertaking scoping reviews, and an update on methodological guidance for the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews.Despite available guidance, some publications use the term 'scoping review' without clear consideration of available reporting and methodological tools. Selection of the most appropriate review type for the stated research objectives or questions, standardised use of methodological approaches and terminology in scoping reviews, clarity and consistency of reporting and ensuring that the reporting and presentation of the results clearly addresses the review's objective(s) and question(s) are critical components for improving the rigour of scoping reviews.Rigourous, high-quality scoping reviews should clearly follow up to date methodological guidance and reporting criteria. Stakeholder engagement is one area where further work could occur to enhance integration of consultation with the results of evidence syntheses and to support effective knowledge translation. Scoping review methodology is evolving as a policy and decision-making tool. Ensuring the integrity of scoping reviews by adherence to up-to-date reporting standards is integral to supporting well-informed decision-making.

Keywords: Evidence synthesis; Methodological guidance; Reporting guidelines; Research methodology; Scoping reviews.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Humans
Research Design*
Systematic Reviews as Topic* / methods

Grants and funding

001/WHO_/World Health Organization/International