![]() Third, scoping reviews aim to provide a descriptive overview of the reviewed material without critically appraising individual studies or synthesizing evidence from different studies (Arksey and O'Malley, 2005 Brien et al., 2010). Second, scoping reviews generally include a greater range of study designs and methodologies than systematic reviews addressing the effectiveness of interventions, which often focus on randomized controlled trials (Arksey and O'Malley, 2005). Subsequently, a scoping review seeks to present an overview of a potentially large and diverse body of literature pertaining to a broad topic, whereas a systematic review attempts to collate empirical evidence from a relatively smaller number of studies pertaining to a focused research question (Arksey and O'Malley, 2005 Higgins and Green, 2011). First, the purpose of a scoping review is to map the body of literature on a topic area (Arksey and O'Malley, 2005), whereas the purpose of a systematic review is to sum up the best available research on a specific question (Campbell Collaboration, 2013). The key differences between the two review methods can be attributed to their differing purposes and aims. Scoping reviews share a number of the same processes as systematic reviews as they both use rigorous and transparent methods to comprehensively identify and analyze all the relevant literature pertaining to a research question (DiCenso et al., 2010). As it provides a rigorous and transparent method for mapping areas of research, a scoping review can be used as a standalone project or as a preliminary step to a systematic review (Arksey and O'Malley, 2005). They are commonly undertaken to examine the extent, range, and nature of research activity in a topic area determine the value and potential scope and cost of undertaking a full systematic review summarize and disseminate research findings and identify research gaps in the existing literature (Arksey and O'Malley, 2005 Levac et al., 2010). A scoping review of a body of literature can be of particular use when the topic has not yet been extensively reviewed or is of a complex or heterogeneous nature (Mays et al., 2001). It aims to map the existing literature in a field of interest in terms of the volume, nature, and characteristics of the primary research (Arksey and O'Malley, 2005). The scoping review has become an increasingly popular approach for synthesizing research evidence (Davis et al., 2009 Levac et al., 2010 Daudt et al., 2013).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |