Knowledge Synthesis & Systematic Reviews

What is a Scoping Review?

Scoping reviews (also known as mapping reviews) are exploratory research projects that systematically map the literature on a relatively broad topic, by identifying key concepts, theories, and sources of evidence that inform practice in the field. The main objectives of a scoping review are to assess the size and scope of available research literature, identify gaps in current research, and highlight areas that require further inquiry. Scoping reviews can use qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods approaches. 

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. However, the scoping review process can be interative, where researchers adjust their focus based on what they discover as they analyise what they have found so far. Literature searches for scoping reviews are exhaustive, and often incorporate literature that is not published by commercial publishers, or indexed in commercial databases and catalogues - for example, governmental or private sector research, dissertations, and conference abstracts. 

The 5 main steps to successfully complete a scoping review are:

1. Identify – What is the research question(s) - what domain needs to be explored?
2. Find – locate relevant studies - electronic databases, reference lists, websites, conference proceedings, clinical trials, etc.
3. Select – Choose studies that are relevant to the question(s) – use predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria.
4. Extract/chart – organize the data from relevant studies selected.
5. Collate – Summarize and report the results.

Recommended Resources

• Peters, Micah D.J. et al. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis: October 2020 - Volume 18 - Issue 10 - p 2119-2126 doi: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167
• White, H., Albers, B., Gaarder, M., Kornør, H., Littell, J., Marshall, Z., Mathew, C., Pigott, T., Snilstveit, B., Waddington, H., & Welch, V. (2020). Guidance for producing a Campbell evidence and gap map. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 16(4), e1125. https://doi.org/10.1002/
• 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.
• Khalil H, Tricco AC. Differentiating between mapping reviews and scoping reviews in the evidence synthesis ecosystem. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Sep;149:175-182. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.05.012. 
• Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology. 2005 Feb 1;8(1):19-32.
• Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation science. 2010 Dec;5:1-9.
• Daudt, H.M., van Mossel, C. & Scott, S.J. Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. BMC Med Res Methodol 13, 48 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-48
• Pollock, D et al. Recommendations for the extraction, analysis, and presentation of results in scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis ():10.11124/JBIES-22-00123, October 14, 2022. | DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-22-00123 
• 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. 

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.