All the contributors will be appreciated for their answers in this discussion.
A systematic review explicitly aims to answer/respond to a pre-specified and relatively circumscribed research question by systematically searching for AND evaluating primary research evidence.
On the other hand, a scoping review, in my view, is a systematic endeavor that aims to explore the state of the literature that can be potentially used to answer a research question. Among the few similarities between the two designs is that they involve systematic searching of evidence for at least some semblance of a research question, which the systematic review attempts to answer (and the scoping review do not attempt to). One of the many possible end goals of a scoping review is to assess the feasibility of conducting a future systematic review on the topic.
The following references can provide further information on scoping reviews:
1. https://www.journalofhospitalmedicine.com/jhospmed/article/202729/hospital-medicine/methods-research-evidence-synthesis-scoping-review
2. Article PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist...
Scoping Review: Preliminary assessment of potential size and scope of available research literature. Aims to identify the nature and extent of research evidence (usually including ongoing research). No formal quality assessment. Typically tabular with some narrative commentary.
Systematic review: Seeks to systematically search for, appraise and synthesize research evidence, often adhering to guidelines on the conduct of a review. Aims for exhaustive, comprehensive searching. Quality assessment may determine inclusion/exclusion. It can be with or without meta-analysis.
In my view, unlike a systematic review, a scoping review (i) tries to answer a broader research question, identify research gaps, (ii) it includes diverse literature on the given topic, (iii) quality assessment of included studies/documents and protocol registration are optional. But scoping review protocol can be registered now with INPLAYS. Please find the link
https://inplasy.com/scoping-reviews/
maybe interesting:
Grant, M. J. & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26, 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Systematic reviews are resource intensive. To find out whether starting work on one is a good idea, some researchers conduct a scoping review first to find out more about the body of evidence in a particular topic area. Scoping reviews are exploratory, and they typically address a broad question.
The difference between a systematic review and a scoping review
https://www.covidence.org/blog/the-difference-between-a-systematic-review-and-a-scoping-review/
A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency
Mai T Pham, Andrijana Rajić
Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach
By Zachary Munn and Micah D. J. Peters
Hi, The diffetence as in the following :
https://www.covidence.org/blog/the-difference-between-a-systematic-review-and-a-scoping-review/
Socping review often have a broad aim and research question to provide an overview of an area, and systematic reviews review a specific narrowed aim/research question.
Article Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors wh...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Writing