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

@article{Tricco2018PRISMAEF,
  title={PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation},
  author={Andrea C. Tricco and Erin Lillie and Wasifa Zarin and Kelly Kathleen O’Brien and Heather L. Colquhoun and Danielle Elaine Levac and David Moher and Micah D.J. Peters and Tanya Horsley and Laura Weeks and Susanne Hempel and Elie A. Akl and Christine S Chang and Jessie McGowan and Lesley A Stewart and Lisa Hartling and Adrian Aldcroft and Michael Wilson and Chantelle Marie Garritty and Simon Lewin and Christina Godfrey and Marilyn Macdonald and Etienne V. Langlois and Karla Soares-Weiser and Jo Moriarty and Tammy Clifford and zge Tunalp and Sharon E. Straus},
  journal={Annals of Internal Medicine},
  year={2018},
  volume={169},
  pages={467-473}
}
Scoping reviews can be conducted to meet various objectives. They may examine the extent (that is, size), range (variety), and nature (characteristics) of the evidence on a topic or question; determine the value of undertaking a systematic review; summarize findings from a body of knowledge that is heterogeneous in methods or discipline; or identify gaps in the literature to aid the planning and commissioning of future research (1, 2). A recent scoping review by members of our team suggested… 

Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

TLDR
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.

The importance and value of reporting guidance for scoping reviews: A rehabilitation science example

TLDR
The PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMAScR) is found to be an effective tool to guide a structured reflection on the authors' scoping review reporting, and authors completing scoping reviews to make use of the PRISma-ScR to guide their own scoped review reporting.

Scoping Reviews and Systematic Reviews: Is It an Either/Or Question?

TLDR
The guidance document clearly established the important role and contribution of scoping reviews and shines light on the essential ways in which scoped reviews differ from other systematic reviews.

Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews.

TLDR
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.

Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application

TLDR
The purpose of this paper is to provide readers with a concise source of information regarding the difference between scoped 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.

Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach

TLDR
The purpose of this article is to clearly describe the differences in indications between scoping reviews and systematic reviews and to provide guidance for when a scoping review is (and is not) appropriate.

PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews

TLDR
The intent of PRISMA-S is to complement the PRISma Statement and its extensions by providing a checklist that could be used by interdisciplinary authors, editors, and peer reviewers to verify that each component of a search is completely reported and therefore reproducible.

Scoping reviews: the PAGER framework for improving the quality of reporting

TLDR
A structured approach to analysis and reporting of scoping reviews: the PAGER (Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations) framework is put forward.

PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews*

TLDR
The intent of PRISMA-S is to complement the PRISma Statement and its extensions by providing a checklist that could be used by interdisciplinary authors, editors, and peer reviewers to verify that each component of a search is completely reported and, therefore, reproducible.
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 56 REFERENCES

Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews

TLDR
The methodology and guidance for the conduct of systematic scoping reviews outlined below was developed by members of the JoAnna Briggs Institute and members of five Joanna Briggs Collaborating Centres.

A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews

TLDR
The number of scoping reviews conducted per year has steadily increased since 2012, and in particular, there is need for a guideline to standardize reporting.

Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting.

Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

TLDR
A framework for conducting a scoping study is outlined based on recent experiences of reviewing the literature on services for carers for people with mental health problems and it is suggested that a wider debate is called for about the role of the scoped study in relation to other types of literature reviews.

Advancing scoping study methodology: a web-based survey and consultation of perceptions on terminology, definition and methodological steps

TLDR
A cross-sectional web-based survey with clinicians, educators, researchers, knowledge users, representatives from community-based organizations, graduate students, and policy stakeholders with experience and/or interest in conducting scoping studies to gain an understanding of experiences and perspectives on the conduct and reporting of scoped studies.

Scoping studies: advancing the methodology

TLDR
Specific recommendations to clarify and enhance this methodology are outlined for each stage of the Arksey and O'Malley framework, to support the advancement, application and relevance of scoping studies in health research.

A scoping review of rapid review methods

TLDR
Numerous rapid review approaches were identified and few were used consistently in the literature; a prospective study comparing the results from rapid reviews to those obtained through systematic reviews is warranted.

[Methods of evidence mapping. A systematic review].

TLDR
The aim of this systematic review is to describe the methodology and terminology used in evidence mapping and to demonstrate the continuum betweenevidence mapping and traditional systematic reviews.

Characteristics and knowledge synthesis approach for 456 network meta-analyses: a scoping review

TLDR
The characteristics and methodological quality of knowledge synthesis approaches underlying the NMA process and the analytical process for NMAs are poorly reported and need improvement.
...