Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

doi:10.11124/JBIES-20-00167

. 2020 Oct;18(10):2119-2126.

doi: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167.

Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

Micah D J Peters^{1

2

3}, Casey Marnie¹, Andrea C Tricco^{4

5

6}, Danielle Pollock⁷, Zachary Munn⁷, Lyndsay Alexander^{8

9}, Patricia McInerney^{10

11}, Christina M Godfrey^{6

12}, Hanan Khalil^{13

14}

Affiliations

¹ Rosemary Bryant AO Research Centre, UniSA Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
² School of Nursing, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
³ The Centre for Evidence-based Practice South Australia (CEPSA): A JBI Centre of Excellence Adelaide, SA, Australia.
⁴ Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁵ Epidemiology Division and Institute of Health Management, Policy, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁶ Queen's Collaboration for Health Care Quality: A JBI Centre of Excellence Kingston, ON, Canada.
⁷ JBI, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
⁸ School of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
⁹ The Scottish Centre for Evidence-based Multi-professional Practice: A JBI Centre of Excellence Aberdeen, Scotland.
¹⁰ Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, GT, South Africa.
¹¹ The Wits-JBI Centre for Evidence-Based Practice: A JBI Affiliated Group Johannesburg, GT, South Africa.
¹² School of Nursing, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
¹³ School of Psychology and Public Health, Department of Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Vic, Australia.
¹⁴ The Queensland Centre of Evidence Based Nursing and Midwifery: A JBI Centre of Excellence, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

PMID: 33038124
DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167

Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

Micah D J Peters et al. JBI Evid Synth. 2020 Oct.

. 2020 Oct;18(10):2119-2126.

doi: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Rosemary Bryant AO Research Centre, UniSA Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
² School of Nursing, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
³ The Centre for Evidence-based Practice South Australia (CEPSA): A JBI Centre of Excellence Adelaide, SA, Australia.
⁴ Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁵ Epidemiology Division and Institute of Health Management, Policy, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁶ Queen's Collaboration for Health Care Quality: A JBI Centre of Excellence Kingston, ON, Canada.
⁷ JBI, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
⁸ School of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
⁹ The Scottish Centre for Evidence-based Multi-professional Practice: A JBI Centre of Excellence Aberdeen, Scotland.
¹⁰ Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, GT, South Africa.
¹¹ The Wits-JBI Centre for Evidence-Based Practice: A JBI Affiliated Group Johannesburg, GT, South Africa.
¹² School of Nursing, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
¹³ School of Psychology and Public Health, Department of Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Vic, Australia.
¹⁴ The Queensland Centre of Evidence Based Nursing and Midwifery: A JBI Centre of Excellence, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

PMID: 33038124
DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this paper is to describe the updated methodological guidance for conducting a JBI scoping review, with a focus on new updates to the approach and development of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (the PRISMA-ScR).

Introduction: Scoping reviews are an increasingly common approach to informing decision-making and research based on the identification and examination of the literature on a given topic or issue. Scoping reviews draw on evidence from any research methodology and may also include evidence from non-research sources, such as policy. In this manner, scoping reviews provide a comprehensive overview to address broader review questions than traditionally more specific systematic reviews of effectiveness or qualitative evidence. The increasing popularity of scoping reviews has been accompanied by the development of a reporting guideline: the PRISMA-ScR. In 2014, the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group developed guidance for scoping reviews that received minor updates in 2017 and was most recently updated in 2020. The updates reflect ongoing and substantial developments in approaches to scoping review conduct and reporting. As such, the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group recognized the need to revise the guidance to align with the current state of knowledge and reporting standards in evidence synthesis.

Methods: Between 2015 and 2020, the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group expanded its membership; extensively reviewed the literature; engaged via annual face-to-face meetings, regular teleconferences, and email correspondence; sought advice from methodological experts; facilitated workshops; and presented at scientific conferences. This process led to updated guidance for scoping reviews published in the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. The updated chapter was endorsed by JBI's International Scientific Committee in 2020.

Results: The updated JBI guidance for scoping reviews includes additional guidance on several methodological issues, such as when a scoping review is (or is not) appropriate, and how to extract, analyze, and present results, and provides clarification for implications for practice and research. Furthermore, it is aligned with the PRISMA-ScR to ensure consistent reporting.

Conclusions: The latest JBI guidance for scoping reviews provides up-to-date guidance that can be used by authors when conducting a scoping review. Furthermore, it aligns with the PRISMA-ScR, which can be used to report the conduct of a scoping review. A series of ongoing and future methodological projects identified by the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group to further refine the methodology are planned.

PubMed Disclaimer

Cited by

De quelles façons les infirmières peuvent-elles promouvoir la résilience chez les adolescents atteints d’un cancer en traitement actif?: un examen de la portée.
Bernier P. Bernier P. Can Oncol Nurs J. 2024 Apr 1;34(2):166-172. doi: 10.5737/23688076342166. eCollection 2024 Spring. Can Oncol Nurs J. 2024. PMID: 38706644 Free PMC article. French.
Policy interventions to improve the accessibility and affordability of Dutch dental care. A scoping review of effective interventions.
Wolf EH, Ziesemer KA, Van der Hijden EJE. Wolf EH, et al. Heliyon. 2024 Apr 17;10(9):e28886. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28886. eCollection 2024 May 15. Heliyon. 2024. PMID: 38707350 Free PMC article.
Measures of sleep are not routinely captured in trials assessing treatment outcomes in knee osteoarthritis - A scoping systematic review and call to action.
Feda J, Miller T, Young JL, Neilson B, Rhon DI. Feda J, et al. Osteoarthr Cartil Open. 2023 Aug 14;5(4):100400. doi: 10.1016/j.ocarto.2023.100400. eCollection 2023 Dec. Osteoarthr Cartil Open. 2023. PMID: 37636007 Free PMC article.
Scoping review protocol to map the use of text-based two-way communication between patients and healthcare professionals after hospital discharge and identify facilitators and barriers to implementation.
Jensen LWH, Ghaffari A, Dinesen BI, Rahbek O, Kold S. Jensen LWH, et al. BMJ Open. 2022 Sep 22;12(9):e062087. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062087. BMJ Open. 2022. PMID: 36137634 Free PMC article.
Examining the meaning and methodological characteristics of the systematized review label: A scoping review protocol.
Premji Z, Cabugos L. Premji Z, et al. PLoS One. 2023 Sep 8;18(9):e0291145. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291145. eCollection 2023. PLoS One. 2023. PMID: 37682919 Free PMC article.

See all "Cited by" articles

References

1. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: How will we ever keep up? PLoS Med 2010; 7 (9):e1000326.
1. Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J 2009; 26 (2):91–108.
1. Tricco AC, Soobiah C, Antony J, Cogo E, MacDonald H, Lillie E, et al. A scoping review identifies multiple emerging knowledge synthesis methods, but few studies operationalize the method. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 73:19–28.
1. Sutton A, Clowes M, Preston L, Booth A. Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Info Libr J 2019; 36 (3):202–222.
1. Ehrich K, Freeman GK, Richards SC, Robinson IC, Shepperd S. How to do a scoping exercise: continuity of care. Res Policy Plann 2002; 20 (1):25–29.

MeSH terms

Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources
- Ovid Technologies, Inc.
- Wolters Kluwer
Research Materials
- NCI CPTC Antibody Characterization Program

[1] Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: How will we ever keep up? PLoS Med 2010; 7 (9):e1000326.

[2] Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: How will we ever keep up? PLoS Med 2010; 7 (9):e1000326.

[3] Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J 2009; 26 (2):91–108.

[4] Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J 2009; 26 (2):91–108.

[5] Tricco AC, Soobiah C, Antony J, Cogo E, MacDonald H, Lillie E, et al. A scoping review identifies multiple emerging knowledge synthesis methods, but few studies operationalize the method. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 73:19–28.

[6] Tricco AC, Soobiah C, Antony J, Cogo E, MacDonald H, Lillie E, et al. A scoping review identifies multiple emerging knowledge synthesis methods, but few studies operationalize the method. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 73:19–28.

[7] Sutton A, Clowes M, Preston L, Booth A. Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Info Libr J 2019; 36 (3):202–222.

[8] Sutton A, Clowes M, Preston L, Booth A. Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Info Libr J 2019; 36 (3):202–222.

[9] Ehrich K, Freeman GK, Richards SC, Robinson IC, Shepperd S. How to do a scoping exercise: continuity of care. Res Policy Plann 2002; 20 (1):25–29.

[10] Ehrich K, Freeman GK, Richards SC, Robinson IC, Shepperd S. How to do a scoping exercise: continuity of care. Res Policy Plann 2002; 20 (1):25–29.

Save citation to file

Email citation

Add to Collections

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search

Create a file for external citation management software

Your RSS Feed

Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

Affiliations

Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

Authors

Affiliations

Abstract

Similar articles

Cited by

References

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources

Research Materials

Abstract

Similar articles

Cited by

References

MeSH terms

Related information

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources

Research Materials