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 describ...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2016-02-01
|
Series: | BMC Medical Research Methodology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4 |
id |
doaj-f803329113034cb195d8e27365d9b19e |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-f803329113034cb195d8e27365d9b19e2020-11-25T01:03:30ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882016-02-0116111010.1186/s12874-016-0116-4A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviewsAndrea C. Tricco0Erin Lillie1Wasifa Zarin2Kelly O’Brien3Heather Colquhoun4Monika Kastner5Danielle Levac6Carmen Ng7Jane Pearson Sharpe8Katherine Wilson9Meghan Kenny10Rachel Warren11Charlotte Wilson12Henry T. Stelfox13Sharon E. Straus14Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of TorontoDepartment of Occupational Science & Occupational Therapy, University of TorontoLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalSchool of Rehabilitation Science, University of OttawaLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of CalgaryLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s HospitalAbstract 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.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4Scoping reviewsReportingKnowledge synthesisSystematic reviewMethods |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Andrea C. Tricco Erin Lillie Wasifa Zarin Kelly O’Brien Heather Colquhoun Monika Kastner Danielle Levac Carmen Ng Jane Pearson Sharpe Katherine Wilson Meghan Kenny Rachel Warren Charlotte Wilson Henry T. Stelfox Sharon E. Straus |
spellingShingle |
Andrea C. Tricco Erin Lillie Wasifa Zarin Kelly O’Brien Heather Colquhoun Monika Kastner Danielle Levac Carmen Ng Jane Pearson Sharpe Katherine Wilson Meghan Kenny Rachel Warren Charlotte Wilson Henry T. Stelfox Sharon E. Straus A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews BMC Medical Research Methodology Scoping reviews Reporting Knowledge synthesis Systematic review Methods |
author_facet |
Andrea C. Tricco Erin Lillie Wasifa Zarin Kelly O’Brien Heather Colquhoun Monika Kastner Danielle Levac Carmen Ng Jane Pearson Sharpe Katherine Wilson Meghan Kenny Rachel Warren Charlotte Wilson Henry T. Stelfox Sharon E. Straus |
author_sort |
Andrea C. Tricco |
title |
A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews |
title_short |
A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews |
title_full |
A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews |
title_fullStr |
A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews |
title_full_unstemmed |
A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews |
title_sort |
scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
BMC Medical Research Methodology |
issn |
1471-2288 |
publishDate |
2016-02-01 |
description |
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. |
topic |
Scoping reviews Reporting Knowledge synthesis Systematic review Methods |
url |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT andreactricco ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT erinlillie ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT wasifazarin ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT kellyobrien ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT heathercolquhoun ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT monikakastner ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT daniellelevac ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT carmenng ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT janepearsonsharpe ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT katherinewilson ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT meghankenny ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT rachelwarren ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT charlottewilson ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT henrytstelfox ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT sharonestraus ascopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT andreactricco scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT erinlillie scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT wasifazarin scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT kellyobrien scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT heathercolquhoun scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT monikakastner scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT daniellelevac scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT carmenng scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT janepearsonsharpe scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT katherinewilson scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT meghankenny scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT rachelwarren scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT charlottewilson scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT henrytstelfox scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews AT sharonestraus scopingreviewontheconductandreportingofscopingreviews |
_version_ |
1725200953742721024 |