"How-to": scoping review?

Abstract

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.

Keywords: Evidence and gap maps; Evidence synthesis; Evidence-based health care; Knowledge synthesis; Mapping reviews; Research methodology; Scoping reviews.