A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews
- PMID: 26857112
- PMCID: PMC4746911
- DOI: 10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4
A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews
Abstract
Background: Scoping reviews are used to identify knowledge gaps, set research agendas, and identify implications for decision-making. The conduct and reporting of scoping reviews is inconsistent in the literature. We conducted a scoping review to identify: papers that utilized and/or described scoping review methods; guidelines for reporting scoping reviews; and studies that assessed the quality of reporting of scoping reviews.
Methods: We searched nine electronic databases for published and unpublished literature scoping review papers, scoping review methodology, and reporting guidance for scoping reviews. Two independent reviewers screened citations for inclusion. Data abstraction was performed by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. Quantitative (e.g. frequencies of methods) and qualitative (i.e. content analysis of the methods) syntheses were conducted.
Results: After searching 1525 citations and 874 full-text papers, 516 articles were included, of which 494 were scoping reviews. The 494 scoping reviews were disseminated between 1999 and 2014, with 45% published after 2012. Most of the scoping reviews were conducted in North America (53%) or Europe (38%), and reported a public source of funding (64%). The number of studies included in the scoping reviews ranged from 1 to 2600 (mean of 118). Using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology guidance for scoping reviews, only 13% of the scoping reviews reported the use of a protocol, 36% used two reviewers for selecting citations for inclusion, 29% used two reviewers for full-text screening, 30% used two reviewers for data charting, and 43% used a pre-defined charting form. In most cases, the results of the scoping review were used to identify evidence gaps (85%), provide recommendations for future research (84%), or identify strengths and limitations (69%). We did not identify any guidelines for reporting scoping reviews or studies that assessed the quality of scoping review reporting.
Conclusion: The number of scoping reviews conducted per year has steadily increased since 2012. Scoping reviews are used to inform research agendas and identify implications for policy or practice. As such, improvements in reporting and conduct are imperative. Further research on scoping review methodology is warranted, and in particular, there is need for a guideline to standardize reporting.
Figures


Similar articles
-
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881. Med J Aust. 2020. PMID: 33314144
-
Identifying optimal frameworks to implement or evaluate digital health interventions: a scoping review protocol.BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 13;10(8):e037643. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037643. BMJ Open. 2020. PMID: 32792444 Free PMC article.
-
A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency.Res Synth Methods. 2014 Dec;5(4):371-85. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1123. Epub 2014 Jul 24. Res Synth Methods. 2014. PMID: 26052958 Free PMC article.
-
Interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research: a scoping review protocol.BMJ Open. 2017 Nov 16;7(11):e017551. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017551. BMJ Open. 2017. PMID: 29150467 Free PMC article.
-
Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review.Syst Rev. 2023 Dec 14;12(1):238. doi: 10.1186/s13643-023-02396-x. Syst Rev. 2023. PMID: 38098023 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Processes and tools to improve teamwork and communication in surgical settings: a narrative review.BMJ Open Qual. 2020 Jun;9(2):e000937. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2020-000937. BMJ Open Qual. 2020. PMID: 32554445 Free PMC article. Review. No abstract available.
-
Perceived barriers and facilitators to the adoption of telemedicine infectious diseases consultations in southeastern Missouri hospitals.J Telemed Telecare. 2024 Oct;30(9):1462-1474. doi: 10.1177/1357633X221149461. Epub 2023 Jan 19. J Telemed Telecare. 2024. PMID: 36659820 Free PMC article.
-
Improving health-promoting self-care in family carers of people with dementia: a review of interventions.Clin Interv Aging. 2019 Mar 1;14:515-523. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S190610. eCollection 2019. Clin Interv Aging. 2019. PMID: 30880932 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the health sciences: Best practice methods for research syntheses.Soc Sci Med. 2019 Jul;233:237-251. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.05.035. Epub 2019 May 28. Soc Sci Med. 2019. PMID: 31233957 Free PMC article.
-
Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews.Syst Rev. 2023 Jun 8;12(1):96. doi: 10.1186/s13643-023-02255-9. Syst Rev. 2023. PMID: 37291658 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials