Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

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.

[1]  A. Rajić,et al.  A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency , 2014, Research synthesis methods.

[2]  Zachary Munn,et al.  Access to primary health care services for Indigenous peoples: A framework synthesis , 2016, International Journal for Equity in Health.

[3]  Anthea Sutton,et al.  Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. , 2019, Health information and libraries journal.

[4]  Patricia McInerney,et al.  An Evidence-Based Approach to Scoping Reviews. , 2016, Worldviews on evidence-based nursing.

[5]  Birte Snilstveit,et al.  Evidence & Gap Maps: A tool for promoting evidence informed policy and strategic research agendas. , 2016, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[6]  Lisa Hartling,et al.  Same family, different species: methodological conduct and quality varies according to purpose for five types of knowledge synthesis. , 2017, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[7]  Stephen Peckham,et al.  Asking the right questions: Scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services , 2008, Health research policy and systems.

[8]  Patricia McInerney,et al.  Evaluation of the JBI scoping reviews methodology by current users. , 2020, International journal of evidence-based healthcare.

[9]  Sharon E. Straus,et al.  A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews , 2016, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[10]  Monika Kastner,et al.  A scoping review identifies multiple emerging knowledge synthesis methods, but few studies operationalize the method. , 2016, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[11]  H. Arksey,et al.  Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework , 2005 .

[12]  Zachary Munn,et al.  Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach , 2018, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[13]  D. Levac,et al.  Barriers, Facilitators and Interventions to Support Virtual Reality Implementation in Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review , 2018, PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation.

[14]  Sally Richards,et al.  Short Report How to do a Scoping Exercise: Continuity of Care , 2002 .

[15]  H. Bastian,et al.  Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? , 2010, PLoS medicine.

[16]  J. Parr,et al.  Models of transitional care for young people with complex health needs: a scoping review. , 2011, Child: care, health and development.

[17]  D. Levac,et al.  Scoping studies: advancing the methodology , 2010, Implementation science : IS.

[18]  Maria J Grant,et al.  A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. , 2009, Health information and libraries journal.

[19]  J. McGowan,et al.  PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation , 2018, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[20]  Zachary Munn,et al.  Characteristics of Indigenous primary health care service delivery models: a systematic scoping review , 2018, Globalization and Health.

[21]  Zachary Munn,et al.  What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences , 2018, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[22]  D. Parker,et al.  Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews , 2015, International journal of evidence-based healthcare.

[23]  J. McGowan,et al.  PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. , 2016, Journal of clinical epidemiology.