Navigate the links below to jump to a specific section of the page:

• Definition
• When is a Scoping Review methodology appropriate?
• Outline of Stages
• Methods and Guidance
• Examples of Scoping Reviews
• Supplementary Resources

According to Colquhoun et al. (2014), a scoping review can be defined as: "a form of knowledge synthesis, which incorporate a range of study designs to comprehensively summarize and synthesize evidence with the aim of informing practice, programs, and policy and providing direction to future research priorities" (p.1291).

Characteristics

• Answers a broad question
• Scoping reviews serve the purpose of identifying the scope and extent of existing research on a topic
• Similar to systematic reviews, scoping reviews follow a step-by-step process and aim to be transparent and replicable in its methods

When to Use It: A scoping review might be right for you if you are interested in:

• Examining the extent, range, and nature of research activity
• Determining the value of undertaking a full systematic review (e.g. Do any studies exist? Have systematic reviews already been conducted?)
• Summarizing the disseminating research findings
• Identifying gaps in an existing body of literature

The following stages of conducting a review of complex interventions are derived from Peters et al. (2015) and Levac et al. (2010).

Timeframe: 12+ months, (same amount of time as a systematic review or longer)

*Varies beyond the type of review. Depends on many factors such as but not limited to: resources available, the quantity and quality of the literature, and the expertise or experience of reviewers" (Grant & Booth, 2009).

Question: Answers broader and topic focused questions beyond those relating to the effectiveness of treatments or interventions. A priori review protocol is recommended. 

Is your review question a complex intervention? Learn more about Reviews of Complex Interventions.

Sources and searches: Comprehensive search-may be limited by time/scope restraints, still aims to be thorough and repeatable of all literature. May involve multiple structured searches rather than a single structured search. This will produce more results than a systematic review. Must include a modified PRISMA flow diagram.

Selection: Based on inclusion/exclusion criteria, due to the iterative nature of a scoping review some changes may be necessary. May require more time spent screening articles due to the larger volume of results from broader questions.

Appraisal: Critical appraisal (optional), Risk of Bias assessment (optional) is not applicable for scoping reviews. 

Synthesis: (Tabular with some narrative) The extraction of data for a scoping review may include a charting table or form but a formal synthesis of findings from individual studies and the generation of a 'summary of findings' (SOF) table is not required. Results may include a logical diagram or table or any descriptive form that aligns with the scope and objectives of the review. May incorporate a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis.

Consultation: (optional) 

The following resources provide methods and guidance in the field of scoping reviews.

Methods & Guidance

Reporting Guideline

• Håkonsen, S. J., Pedersen, P. U., Bjerrum, M., Bygholm, A., & Peters, M. (2018). Nursing minimum data sets for documenting nutritional care for adults in primary healthcare: a scoping review. JBI database of systematic reviews and implementation reports, 16(1), 117–139. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2017-003386
• Kao, S. S., Peters, M., Dharmawardana, N., Stew, B., & Ooi, E. H. (2017). Scoping review of pediatric tonsillectomy quality of life assessment instruments. The Laryngoscope, 127(10), 2399–2406. doi: 10.1002/lary.26522
• Tricco, A. C., Zarin, W., Rios, P., Nincic, V., Khan, P. A., Ghassemi, M., Diaz, S., Pham, B., Straus, S. E., & Langlois, E. V. (2018). Engaging policy-makers, health system managers, and policy analysts in the knowledge synthesis process: a scoping review. Implementation science: IS, 13(1), 31. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0717-x

• Anderson, S., Allen, P., Peckham, S., & Goodwin, N. (2008). Asking the right questions: scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services. Health research policy and systems, 6, 7. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-6-7

• Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology, 8(1), 19-32. doi: 10.1080/1364557032000119616

• Armstrong, R., Hall, B. J., Doyle, J., & Waters, E. (2011). Cochrane Update. 'Scoping the scope' of a cochrane review. Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 33(1), 147–150. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdr015

• Colquhoun, H. (2016). Current best practices for the conducting of scoping reviews. Symposium Presentation - Impactful Biomedical Research: Achieving Quality and Transparency. https://www.equator-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Gerstein-Library-scoping-reviews_May-12.pdf

• Colquhoun, H. L., Levac, D., O'Brien, K. K., Straus, S., Tricco, A. C., Perrier, L., Kastner, M., & Moher, D. (2014). Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 67(12), 1291–1294. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.013

• Davis, K., Drey, N., & Gould, D. (2009). What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. International journal of nursing studies, 46(10), 1386–1400. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.02.010

• Khalil, H., Peters, M., Godfrey, C. M., McInerney, P., Soares, C. B., & Parker, D. (2016). An evidence-based approach to scoping reviews. Worldviews on evidence-based nursing, 13(2), 118–123. doi: 10.1111/wvn.12144

• Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O'Brien, K. K. (2010). Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation science: IS, 5, 69. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-69

• Lockwood, C., Dos Santos, K. B., & Pap, R. (2019). Practical guidance for knowledge synthesis: scoping review methods. Asian nursing research, 13(5), 287–294. doi: 10.1016/j.anr.2019.11.002

• Morris, M., Boruff, J. T., & Gore, G. C. (2016). Scoping reviews: establishing the role of the librarian. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 104(4), 346–354. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.020

• Munn, Z., Peters, M., 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 methodology, 18(1), 143. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

• O'Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Baxter, L., Tricco, A. C., Straus, S., Wickerson, L., Nayar, A., Moher, D., & O'Malley, L. (2016). Advancing scoping study methodology: a web-based survey and consultation of perceptions on terminology, definition and methodological steps. BMC health services research, 16, 305. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1579-z

• Peters, M. D., Godfrey, C. M., Khalil, H., McInerney, P., Parker, D., & Soares, C. B. (2015). Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. International journal of evidence-based healthcare, 13(3), 141–146. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050

• Peters, M. D. J., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Munn, Z., Tricco, A. C., & Khalil, H. (2020). Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews. In Aromataris, E. & Munn, Z. (Eds.), JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Joanna Briggs Institute. doi: 10.46658/JBIMES-20-12

• Peters, M., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., & Khalil, H. (2021). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI evidence implementation, 19(1), 3–10. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000277

• Pham, M. T., Rajić, A., Greig, J. D., Sargeant, J. M., Papadopoulos, A., & McEwen, S. A. (2014). A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research synthesis methods, 5(4), 371–385. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1123

• Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., Lewin, S., … Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Annals of internal medicine, 169(7), 467–473. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850

• Tricco, A., Oboirien, K., Lotfi, T., & Sambunjak, D. (2017, August). Scoping reviews: what they are and how you can do them. Cochrane Training. https://training.cochrane.org/resource/scoping-reviews-what-they-are-and-how-you-can-do-them