Versions Compared

Old Version 1

changes.mady.by.user Carolyn Phillips

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Bianca Pilla

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Micah DJ Peters, Christina Godfrey, Patricia McInerney, Zachary Munn, Andrea C. Tricco, Hanan Khalil


How to cite: 

Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Munn Z, Tricco AC, Khalil, H. Scoping Reviews (2020). Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Porritt K, Pilla B, Jordan Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI; 2024. Available from: https://synthesismanual.jbi.global.  https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-2024-1209


Contents

Child pages (Children Display)
alltrue

Interim Guidance

JBI Methodology Groups are continuously working to improve, update and further the science of JBI Evidence Syntheses. JBI Methodology chapters are updated when there have been significant changes to a methodology, as determined by the JBI Scientific Committee. Interim guidance for steps, sections or stages of a review methodology is often provided via publications ahead of formal chapter updates. Please see below for relevant interim guidance:

Panel
panelIconIdatlassian-note
panelIcon:note:
bgColor#F4F5F7

Recommendations for the extraction, analysis, and presentation of results in scoping reviews

Pollock et al 2023

Scoping reviewers often face challenges in the extraction, analysis, and presentation of scoping review results. Using best-practice examples and drawing on the expertise of the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group and an editor of a journal that publishes scoping reviews, this paper expands on existing JBI scoping review guidance. The aim of this article is to clarify the process of extracting data from different sources of evidence; discuss what data should be extracted (and what should not); outline how to analyze extracted data, including an explanation of basic qualitative content analysis; and offer suggestions for the presentation of results in scoping reviews.

Panel
panelIconIdatlassian-note
panelIcon:note:
bgColor#F4F5F7

Best practice guidance and reporting items for the development of scoping review protocols

Peters et al 2022

The purpose of this article is to clearly describe how to develop a robust and detailed scoping review protocol, which is the first stage of the scoping review process. This paper provides detailed guidance and a checklist for prospective authors to ensure that their protocols adequately inform both the conduct of the ensuing review and their readership.

Panel
panelIconIdatlassian-note
panelIcon:note:
bgColor#F4F5F7

Conducting high quality scoping reviews-challenges and solutions

Khalil et al 2021

In this paper, the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group discuss the challenges that may be faced in the conduct and publishing of scoping reviews, such as developing an a-priori protocol, developing implications or recommendations for research, policy or practice and a lack of understanding of scoping reviews by journal editors, authors and peer reviewers. It presents solutions to these challenges to ensure better understanding of the process of scoping reviews.

Panel
panelIconIdatlassian-note
panelIcon:note:
bgColor#F4F5F7

Moving from consultation to co-creation with knowledge users in scoping reviews: guidance from the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group

Pollock et al 2022

This paper presents JBI's guidance for knowledge user engagement in scoping reviews based on the expert opinion of the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group. We offer specific guidance on how this can occur and provide information regarding how to report and evaluate knowledge user engagement within scoping reviews.

Panel
panelIconIdatlassian-note
panelIcon:note:
bgColor#F4F5F7

Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

Peters et al 2021

The latest JBI scoping review guidance is described with this article. There is an updated section on when to conduct a scoping review, the role of methodological appraisal in scoping reviews and inclusion of the PRISMA-SCR reporting guidelines.

Panel
panelIconIdatlassian-note
panelIcon:note:
bgColor#F4F5F7

PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

Tricco et al 2018

Even though a scoping review is not considered systematic. An extensive search still needs to be undertaken to ensure that all available evidence is included within your review. This articles describes how you should report on that search in your publications.