Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application.
Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3
复制
发表时间：
2021-10-08
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Tricco AC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Peters MDJ;Marnie C;Colquhoun H;Garritty CM;Hempel S;Horsley T;Langlois EV;Lillie E;O'Brien KK;Tunçalp Ӧ;Wilson MG;Zarin W;Tricco AC
范围界定审查是一种越来越常见的证据综合方法，有越来越多的方法指导和资源来协助审查作者进行规划、实施和报告。范围界定审核的最新指南包括 JBI 方法以及系统审核和元分析的首选报告项目 - 范围界定审核的扩展。本文为读者提供了有关加强和改进范围界定审查的实施和报告的正在进行的工作的简要更新，以及有关范围界定审查方法开发的未来步骤的信息。本文的目的是为读者提供关于范围界定审查与其他审查类型之间的差异、进行范围界定审查的原因以及范围界定审查的实施和报告方法指南的最新信息的简明信息来源。尽管有可用的指导，但一些出版物使用“范围界定审查”一词，但没有明确考虑可用的报告和方法工具。为所述研究目标或问题选择最合适的审查类型、范围界定审查中方法和术语的标准化使用、报告的清晰度和一致性以及确保结果的报告和呈现清楚地解决审查的目标和问题是提高范围界定审查的严谨性的关键组成部分。严格、高质量的范围界定审查应明确遵循最新的方法指南和报告标准。利益相关者参与是可以开展进一步工作的领域之一，以加强咨询与证据综合结果的整合并支持有效的知识转化。范围界定审查方法正在发展成为一种政策和决策工具。通过遵守最新的报告标准来确保范围界定审查的完整性对于支持明智的决策至关重要。
Scoping reviews are an increasingly common approach to evidence synthesis with a growing suite of methodological guidance and resources to assist review authors with their planning, conduct and reporting. The latest guidance for scoping reviews includes the JBI methodology and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses—Extension for Scoping Reviews. This paper provides readers with a brief update regarding ongoing work to enhance and improve the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews as well as information regarding the future steps in scoping review methods development. The purpose of this paper is to provide readers with a concise source of information regarding the difference between scoping reviews and other review types, the reasons for undertaking scoping reviews, and an update on methodological guidance for the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. Despite available guidance, some publications use the term ‘scoping review’ without clear consideration of available reporting and methodological tools. Selection of the most appropriate review type for the stated research objectives or questions, standardised use of methodological approaches and terminology in scoping reviews, clarity and consistency of reporting and ensuring that the reporting and presentation of the results clearly addresses the review’s objective(s) and question(s) are critical components for improving the rigour of scoping reviews. Rigourous, high-quality scoping reviews should clearly follow up to date methodological guidance and reporting criteria. Stakeholder engagement is one area where further work could occur to enhance integration of consultation with the results of evidence syntheses and to support effective knowledge translation. Scoping review methodology is evolving as a policy and decision-making tool. Ensuring the integrity of scoping reviews by adherence to up-to-date reporting standards is integral to supporting well-informed decision-making.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
发表时间：
2010-09-20
期刊：
Implementation science : IS
影响因子：
--
作者：
Levac D;Colquhoun H;O'Brien KK
通讯作者：
O'Brien KK
影响因子：
4
作者：
Munn Z;Peters MDJ;Stern C;Tufanaru C;McArthur A;Aromataris E
通讯作者：
Aromataris E
DOI：
10.1097/xeb.0000000000000202
发表时间：
2020-03-01
影响因子：
--
作者：
Khalil, Hanan;Bennett, Marsha;Peters, Micah
通讯作者：
Peters, Micah
影响因子：
2
作者：
McKerricher, L.;Petrucka, P.
通讯作者：
Petrucka, P.
DOI：
10.1097/xeb.0000000000000050
发表时间：
2015-09-01
影响因子：
--
作者：
Peters, Micah D. J.;Godfrey, Christina M.;Soares, Cassia Baldini
通讯作者：
Soares, Cassia Baldini