Skip to Main Content

Evidence Synthesis OLD VERSION

Steps to the Scoping Review Process

 

Planning: Every type of review needs to start with planning. As you plan, you may have to revise the type of review you conduct. You do not have to follow these steps in a strict order. For example, you might form the team first and then together decide the research question.

Planning Step
Explanation
Determine the purpose of the review

To help you decide what type of review you want to conduct.

Pose a research question

Which should use an established framework, if possible. The research question can be broader and more topical.

Conduct exploratory searches

To identify:

  • existing reviews
  • assess the potential volume of relevant studies
  • locate 2-4 sample studies
Determine whether the project is feasible

Based on time, resources, originality, relevance, etc.

Pick a team

Of at least 3-6 members, including:

  • subject experts
  • method experts
  • information experts
Select preliminary synthesis and analysis methods

Will depend on types of studies (can be qualitative, quantitative, or integrative--a review that integrates both quantitative and qualitative studies)

Design a protocol

Includes eligibility criteria, a timeline, data management, and project management.

May be tweaked as the research progresses but gives direction for the project.

Identifying: Identifying all the possible studies that address your question is key to a scoping review. Your initial searches should yield hundreds if not thousands of citations. Some steps can be done concurrently. For example, one team member can work on searching databases while another works on searching the grey literature.

Identifying Step
Explanation
Identify databases you will search

Including both general and subject specific databases.

Create a search based on your research question

Using advanced search strategies such as combining synonyms with OR and using wildcards and proximity operators to find variants.

Translate the search For each database using appropriate controlled vocabulary and correct syntax.
Store the results of each search

Separately, using a citation manager.

Document each search

Including:

  • number of citations
  • exact search string
  • database
  • date search was run
  • any limits applied
Search grey literature

Such as:

  • theses
  • conference proceedings
  • repositories
  • government documents
  • clinical trial registries

to address publication bias

Search other sources Such as reference lists, relevant journals that are not entirely indexed in databases, and researcher bibliographies.
Helpful Tools

Evaluating: In evaluating your search results, you winnow down the thousands of citations you initially identified to dozens which you will examine more closely. Often some of these steps are done concurrently. For example, after 500 citations have been evaluated for relevancy, the studies chosen for inclusion can be evaluated for quality and bias while the next 500 citations are evaluated for relevancy.

Evaluating Step
Explanation
The citations from the searches are de-duplicated

These are combined into a master list with the resulting number of citations documented.

Each article is evaluated for relevancy

Review all citations for inclusion due to relevancy.

Full text is obtained

For those citations which inclusion cannot be determined by title and abstract alone.

For all citations to be included in the synthesis.

Master list of studies is complied

Some studies may be written up in more than one article.

Some articles may include more than one study.

A list of studies to be included in the synthesis is compiled If any studies are deemed to be of lower quality or biased, documentation of their inclusion or exclusion is necessary.
Helpful Tools
  • Checklists for Critical Review
  • This liCovidence
    A workflow platform that enables researchers to to bring together all the research from around the globe and turn it into summaries of scientific knowledge. Import citations, use machine learning to screen for randomized controlled trials, screen titles and abstracts, upload references, screen full text, extract data, conduct risk of bias, and export data.
  • Rayyan
    A free online tool from Qatar Computing Research Institute and Rayyan Systems that allows you to import lists of articles for tagging and selection.
  • EPPI Reviewer
    A web-based software program for managing and analysing data in literature reviews. Developed for all types of systematic reviews, it manages references, stores PDF files and facilitates qualitative and quantitative analyses such as meta-analysis and thematic synthesis. It also contains some new ‘text mining’ technology which is promising to make systematic reviewing more efficient.
  • SUMARI
     
 

Explaining the Synthesis & Analysis: Scoping reviews include synthesis which summarizes and organizes the information found in the studies that are identified. This synthesis informs the conclusions that are drawn in the review and focuses on both the methodology and results of the studies. Synthesis is typically tabular with some narrative commentary. Analysis characterizes quantity and quality of literature, perhaps by study design and other key features.

Explaining the Synthesis & Analysis
Explanation
Narrative explanations

Can describe trends, themes, frameworks, perspectives, characteristics, quality, etc.

Especially useful for empirical research.

Can use structured narratives.

Often accompanied by tabular explanations.

Tabular explanations

Uses tables to explain the synthesis.

Can be used to describe study characteristics, study measures, study quality, study results, etc.

Accompanies narrative explanations.

Helpful Tools
  • Methods and Approaches for Synthesis and Analysis
  • Data and Digital Scholarship Information
    Baylor Libraries' Data Scholar Program & Workshops, Data Research Fellows
  • Center for Statistical Consulting
    Baylor Statistical Collaboration Center seeks to enhance the quality of research involving statistical methods conducted at Baylor University and with external partners. Provides short-term statistical analysis, long-term collaborative research, and assistance in the preparation of research grant proposals
  • EPPI Reviewer
    a web-based software program for managing and analysing data in literature reviews. Developed for all types of systematic reviews, it manages references, stores PDF files and facilitates qualitative and quantitative analyses such as meta-analysis and thematic synthesis. It also contains some new ‘text mining’ technology which is promising to make systematic reviewing more efficient.
  • NVivo
    NVivo is a qualitative data analysis (QDA) computer software package produced by QSR International. It has been designed for qualitative researchers working with very rich text-based and/or multimedia information, where deep levels of analysis on small or large volumes of data are required. (Descriptions from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NVivo)
  • SUMARI
    The System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (SUMARI) is the Joanna Briggs Institute's software for the systematic review of literature. Supporting 10 review types, it facilitates the entire review process, from protocol development, team management, study selection, critical appraisal, data extraction, data synthesis and writing your systematic review report.
  • OpenMeta[Analyst]
    Open Meta-Analyst is open-source software for performing meta-analyses of binary, continuous, or diagnostic data, using a variety fixed and random-effects methods, including Bayesian and maximum likelihood analysis. Open Meta-Analyst also enables you to do cumulative, leave-one-out, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses.

Summarizing: Summarizing your scoping review allows it to be shared with others.

Identifying Step
Explanation
Identify your audience(s)
  • research funders
  • policy makers
  • practitioners
  • research community
Choose your summary type
  • protocol
  • report
  • presentation
  • peer review publication
Review Standards

Most standards will include these sections:

  • background/introduction
  • methodology including a PRISMA diagram
  • results
  • discussion/conclusions
Write Your Summary

Make sure your work is clear, auditable, replicable, and transparent.

Submit Your Summary
  • registry (protocols are sometimes registered with scoping reviews)
  • summaries are often submitted to peer-reviewed journals or as reports.
Search grey literature

Such as:

  • theses
  • conference proceedings
  • repositories
  • government documents
  • clinical trial registries

to address publication bias

Search other sources Such as reference lists, relevant journals that are not entirely indexed in databases, and researcher bibliographies.
Helpful Tools

University Libraries

One Bear Place #97148
Waco, TX 76798-7148

(254) 710-6702
https://libguides.baylor.edu/c.php?g=1098294&p=9447592
libguides.baylor.edu
CC-MAIN-2024-33
54414
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:JN7PRHGBLOOS5HK3WQNFRDRMEEL3S5HN
<urn:uuid:81cfcb76-64bb-4e12-9895-df19b41a0cb5>
2024-08-09T12:00:14Z
34.194.39.199
text/html
sha1:CS2ECDWZMVLCLA57EVBTLSMROKUTSUNX
<urn:uuid:3aae5754-a056-45e0-8c88-2aafbc24c2cf>
https://libguides.baylor.edu/c.php?g=1098294&p=9447592
response
<urn:uuid:bf4e1c92-c309-4629-86ea-796ded266baf>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2024-33
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for August 2024
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-36
software: Apache Nutch 1.20 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.5-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/