A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2016, Pages

  Tricco, Andrea C ^a,b   Lillie, Erin ^a   Zarin, Wasifa ^a   O'Brien, Kelly ^b,c   Colquhoun, Heather ^b   Kastner, Monika ^a,b   Levac, Danielle ^d   Ng, Carmen ^a   Sharpe, Jane Pearson ^a   Wilson, Katherine ^a   Kenny, Meghan ^a   Warren, Rachel ^a   Wilson, Charlotte ^a   Stelfox, Henry T ^e   Straus, Sharon E ^a,f  

^a ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Knowledge synthesis; Methods; Reporting; Scoping reviews; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; HUMAN; LITERATURE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; PUBLICATIONS; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH REPORT; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84959503206     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: Towards a Methodological Framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19-32.
2. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69.
3. Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):141-6.
4. Colquhoun HL, Levac D, O'Brien KK, Straus S, Tricco AC, Perrier L, et al. Scoping reviews: Time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(12):1291-4.
5. Colquhoun H, O'Brien K, Straus S, Moher D, Levac D. Gaps in scoping review methodologies J Clin Epidemiol. In press.
6. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias: Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;273(5):408-12.
7. Moher D, Stewart L, Shekelle P. All in the Family: Systematic reviews, rapid reviews, scoping reviews, realist reviews, and more. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):183.
8. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan AW, Cronin E, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One. 2008;3(8):e3081.
9. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2007;4(3):e78.
10. 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(1):48.
11. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.
12. Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med. 2010;7(2):e1000217.
13. Thomson L, Fayed N, Sedarous F, Ronen GM. Life quality and health in adolescents and emerging adults with epilepsy during the years of transition: A scoping review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013;56(5):421-33.
14. Sampson M, McGowan J, Cogo E, Grimshaw J, Moher D, Lefebvre C. An evidence-based practice guideline for the peer review of electronic search strategies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(9):944-52.
15. Thulien NS. Innovative approaches to cervical cancer screening for sex trade workers: An international scoping review. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2014;36(3):231-9.
16. Pham MT, Rajic A, Greig JD, Sargeant JM, Papadopoulos A, McEwen SA. A scoping review of scoping reviews: Advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Res Synth Methods. 2014;5(4):371-85.
17. Newton D. Synthesi.SR. Toronto, Canada; 2012. Knowledge Translation Program, St. Michael's Hospital.
18. Moher D, Weeks L, Ocampo M, Seely D, Sampson M, Altman DG, et al. Describing reporting guidelines for health research: A systematic review. 7J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(7):718-42.
19. Straus SE, Tetroe JM, Graham ID. Knowledge translation is the use of knowledge in health care decision making. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(1):6-10.
20. Gagnon M. Knowledge Exchange: Knowledge dissemination and exchange of knowledge. In: Knowledge Translation in Health Care: Moving from Evidence to Practice. Wiley-Blackwell; 2009. p. 233-245.
21. International QSR. NVivo 10. Australia; 2012.
22. Kastner M, Tricco AC, Soobiah C, Lillie E, Perrier L, Horsley T, et al. What is the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to conduct a review? Protocol for a scoping review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:114.
23. Feinberg J. Wordle. 2014. http://www.wordle.net/. Accessed October 2015.
24. Anderson S, Allen P, Peckham S, Goodwin N. Asking the right questions: Scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services. Health Res Policy Syst. 2008;6(7):1-12.
25. Tricco AC, Antony J, Zarin W, Strifler L, Ghassemi M, Ivory J, et al. A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Med. 2015;13:224.
26. Simera I, Moher D, Hirst A, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: Reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network. BMC Med. 2010;8:24.