Scoping studies

Reviews of increasing complexity from simple reviews to systematic reviews...

To browse other articles on a range of HSL topics, see the wiki index.

Introduction

see also Question scans, Rapid evidence-assessments (REAs) and Snowballing

What is a scoping of a topic?

The term ‘scoping’ does not seem to have any commonly-accepted definition but several researchers have attempted to define it such as Arksey & O’Malley, 2005, Anderson et al, 2008 and Davis, 2009.

In health research, a scoping review aims to establish what research has taken place within a specific domain, subject or field (including the review of policy documents, current practice and research). Often this review involves locating organizations and individuals that are relevant to the domain, and what has been published on the topic. In the social sciences, scoping studies are performed at an initial stage of research (ie. program, project, process, or grant).

In a 2010 article in Implementation Science, Levac et al build on the Arksey and O’Malley methodology (see appendix). In fact, they propose six (6) stages for those undertaking a scoping study:

1. clarifying and linking the purpose and research question (stage one)
2. balancing feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping process (stage two)
3. using an iterative team approach to selecting studies (stage three)
4. extracting data (stage four)
5. incorporating a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis, reporting results and considering implications of study findings to policy, practice, or research (stage five);
6. incorporating consultation with stakeholders as a knowledge translation component of scoping (stage six).

Lastly, they propose other considerations for scoping methodologies in order to support the advancement, application and relevance of scoping studies in health research.

• Horizon scanning the AHRQ way

Pre-systematic review searching

In evidence-based practice, scoping studies are undertaken as distinct research projects or, sometimes, as precursors to other types of research. However, a scoping study may be requested as a search prior to undertaking a pre-systematic review or in preparation for costing a research project. The interpretation, methodology and expectations of scoping reviews are variable and suggest that conceptually, scoping is not well-understood or defined. The distinction between scoping as an integral preliminary process in the development of a research proposal or a formative, methodologically rigorous activity in its own right has not been examined. Scoping studies in medicine are slowly evolving; their strength lies in their ability to summarize a body of evidence for quick but accurate synthesis. As with other approaches to evidence synthesis a standardized approach is always welcome. Full literature searching aimed at retrieving a maximum number of relevant studies or articles in a given discipline starts with a scope of a topic.

It should be said that the scoping process is iterative and helps to estimate the size of the biomedical literature in question and the costs of searching it thoroughly. Some health librarians have begun to offer their information retrieval skills for rapid evidence-assessments (REAs) because interdisciplinary topics increase the likelihood of time-consuming searching -- this may be important to know before a large-scale project can be undertaken. Arksey and O'Malley in 2005 outline a methodological framework that identifies different types of scoping studies, and how these compare to systematic reviews.

Strategies for scoping searches

It is a good idea to use a variety of approaches when gathering citations for scoping studies. Combined keyword and wildcard searches are important in maximizing search recall (or sensitivity) but some authors (Sandieson, 2006) promote ‘pearl harvesting’, 'snowballing' and finding seminal articles in the area. Ramer (2005) recommends a similar process for relevant websites called ‘site-ation’. Preparation for a systematic review may involve scoping or at least a literature review. Typically, scoping means locating other systematic reviews and clinical trials on specific topics. Over time, the results from these searches have provided increased focus (or refocus) to aid in the direction of a proposed research proposal. For example, a scan of the literature may show that a review exists in Cochrane or elsewhere and that there is no need to replicate what is available. In any case, scoping searches can begin in the major biomedical databases such as the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Google scholar and PsycINFO which are themselves refining processes; identifying major sources to be searched thoroughly in the second phase of the project is a part of that refinement process. Identifying the most important sources of information to search can vary depending on the intent of the research. Searching protocols may be outlined but require tracking, documentation and taking screenshots as necessary (in Google scholar for example). Searching in the top biomedical databases is not always sufficient for it may be important to identify other resources, non-English materials and grey literature hidden in the deep web.

See also

• Top Biomedical Texts 2010, Print & Online
• Medline & PubMed
• Expert searching
• Filters (ie. hedges)
• Hand-searching
• Nucleotide searching
• Point of care decision-making tools - Overview

References

• Anderson S, Allen P, Peckham S, Goodwin N. Asking the right questions: scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organization and delivery of health services. Health Research and Policy Systems. BioMed Central. 2008;6(7):1–12.
• Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005;8(1):19-32.
• Booth A: How much searching is enough? Comprehensive versus optimal retrieval for technology assessments. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2010;26.
• Clark JS, Mair FS, O'Donnell C, Liu J. E-health: implementation and evaluation research in Scotland -- a scoping exercise. J Telemed Telecare. 2008;14(3):119-21.
• Connor H, MacFarlane K. Work-related learning (WRL) in higher education — a scoping study. Centre for Research Lifelong Learning, Glasgow Caledonian University, Scotland. 2006.
• Davis K, Drey N, Gould D. What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009 Oct;46(10):1386-400. Epub 2009 Mar 27
• Forbes A, While A, Ullman R, Murgatroyd B. The contribution of nurses to child health and child health services: findings of a scoping exercise. Journal of Child Health Care. 2007;11(3):231–247.
• Ganann R, Ciliska D, Thomas H. Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implement Sci 2010, 5:56.
• Haynes RB, McKibbon KA et al. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ. 2005 May 21;330(7501):1179.
• Foster M. The Puzzle of Systematic Reviews: Where do Librarians fit in? (Workshop) Texas A&M Libraries
• Librarians Named in New IOM Standards for Systematic Reviews. Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews, one of two new reports just issued by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), recommends twenty-one standards for performing high-quality reviews. Librarians and other information specialists are mentioned under the “Standards for Finding and Assessing Individual Studies” in how to conduct comprehensive systematic searches for evidence.
• Levac D, Colquhon H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Science 2010, 5:69.
• Mallik M, McGowan B. Issues in practice based learning in nursing in the UK and the Republic of Ireland: results from a multiprofessional scoping exercise. Nurse Ed Today. 2007;27(1):52–59.
• Ramer S. Site-ation pearl growing: methods and librarianship history and theory. JMLA. 2005;93(3):397–400.
• Ring N, Ritchie K, Mandava L, Jepson R. A guide to synthesising qualitative research for researchers undertaking health technology assessments and systematic reviews. NHS Quality Improvement Scotland. 2011
• Sandieson R. Pathfinding in the research forest: the pearl harvesting method for effective information retrieval. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities. 2006;41(4):401–409.