Scoping review methods and resources

Scoping reviews aim to identify and map the available evidence on a given topic. They are useful for examining emerging topics, describing the way research is being conducted, and characterizing the evidence that has informed practice in the field. Scoping reviews minimize potential biases by using explicit, systematic methods documented in advance with a protocol. 

Scoping reviews take time, typically 6-18 months to complete. They require a team of researchers with expertise in the pertinent topic areas, scoping review methods, searching for relevant evidence, and other areas as appropriate. Teams should consider incorporating key users and stakeholders to guide the development of the review.

Why conduct a scoping review?

A scoping review might be conducted for any the following reasons:

  • To identify the types of available evidence in a given field
  • To clarify key concepts / definitions in the literature
  • To examine how research is conducted on a certain topic or field
  • To identify key characteristics or factors related to a concept
  • To serve as a precursor to a systematic review
  • To identify and analyze knowledge gaps

Before conducting a scoping review, you should first consider whether a scoping review is the correct methodology to address your research question. Utilize the decision tree below to confirm review type. 

Image:
A flow diagram depicting decision-making process for selecting the appropriate review methodology.

Enlarge image.

Alternative Methods

Systematic Review

Narrative Review

  • If you determine that a narrative review is the best method, a knowledge base article on scoping reviews will soon be published on the Library's website. 

Umbrella Review

Integrative Review

Rapid Review

How to conduct a scoping review

Below you'll find the critical resources, standards, and steps for scoping reviews. 

Handbook

Scoping reviews adhere to a rigorous set of steps in an effort to reduce potential biases. For step-by-step instructions to conduct your scoping review, please consult:

Chapter 10 of the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis

The JBI has also created a template that you can use to develop your Scoping Review protocol. The template can be accessed through the JBI Scoping Review Network Resources.

Reporting Standards

Scoping reviews should adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The PRISMA for Scoping Reviews Checklist (PRISMA-ScR) ensures that all information that should be reported in a scoping review is reported in the final manuscript. Click here to access the PRISMA-ScR Checklist2020 Flow Diagram, and other reporting checklists like PRISMA for Abstracts and PRISMA Search.

General steps of a scoping review

Chapter 10 of the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis will provide detailed instructions of the steps required to conduct a scoping review:

1. Development of a scoping review protocol
  • Title
  • Developing the title and question
  • Introduction
  • Inclusion criteria
  • Search strategy
  • Source of evidence selection
  • Data extraction
  • Analysis of the evidence
  • Presentation of the results
2. The scoping review and summary of the evidence
  • Title of the scoping review
  • Review authors
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Review question(s)
  • Inclusion Criteria
  • Methods
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusions and recommendations
  • Conflicts and acknowledgements
  • References
  • Review appendices

We highly recommend that you utilize the information and instructions provided in our Preliminary Topic Investigation article to supplement the information in the JBI Manual.

Further training

If you are interested in training for scoping reviews, please consider the following resources:

  • A collection of publications and video trainings about scoping review methodology, a template for creating a protocol, and a platform to connect with researchers that are working on scoping reviews.

JBI Scoping Review Network

  • Educational classes and programs on a variety of topics, including scoping reviews. Attend live classes or watch recordings of previous programs. Recordings require a Columbia UNI to access.

HSL Educational Programs

Further reading

Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC medical research methodology18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

Was this article helpful?
What made the article not helpful?