Skip to Main Content
☰ ATSU Navigation
 

Scoping Reviews

This guide provides a step by step breakdown of how to conduct a scoping review and how librarians can assist in the process.

Scoping Review Protocols

What is a scoping review protocol?

  • It provides a map of the review for every stage of the process
  • Documenting the plan or protocol prior to completing the review reduces the bias and improves the validity
  • A registered protocol establishes provenance of the research project for the specific question

Why should a team register a protocol: 

  • A protocol is considered best practice by the JBI Manual and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews
  • Reduces bias by establishing your criteria a priori
  • Much of the information within the protocol will assist with the article format and writing

Protocols

Open Science Framework (OSF) BMJ figshare
  • Does not have a dedicated scoping review template; research can utilize other available templates or create their own.
  • Facilitates collaboration, transparency, and reproducibility by providing a centralized repository for research materials, including protocols.
  • Researchers can register their scoping review protocols on OSF, even if they were developed using JBI templates.
  • A general platform for open science practices, including the registration and storage of research protocols.
  • Publicly register and share research plans to promote transparency and reproducibility.
  • Typically not peer-reviewed at the registration stage.
  • Flexible format; users can upload documents or use OSF templates.
  • Any research type (qualitative, quantitative, experimental, etc).
  • Can publish with any journal.
  • Using BMJ Open means you will undergo formal peer review, with the benefit of academic credibility and discoverability.
  • Best for researchers looking for formal publication and wide visibility.
  • Open Access
  • Comes iwth Article Processing Fees.
  • Protocol papers should report planned or ongoing studies.
  • Based on reporting guidelines (e.g., PRISMA-P or PRISMA-ScR)
  • Study must not yet be completed (it should be the planning phase or early stage)
  • Outlines the objectives, rationale, and planned methods for conducting a scoping review.
  • A digital repository that enables researchers to upload and share a wide variety of research outputs, including protocols, datasets, figures, and presentations.
  • It automatically assigns a DOI, making content citable and ensuring long-term access.
  • Does not offer peer review or indexing in traditional databases.
  • It's best for sharing protocols as standalone files or supplementary research materials.
  • Open Access
  • Allows researchers to upload and share their protocols, ensuring that the review's objectives, methodology, and search strategies are publicly available.
  • Provides transparency and reproducibility.
  • Provides a unique DOI

Determine Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: 

  • Developed to define the parameters of the research question
  • Determine the limits of the evidence synthesis
  • Exclusion criteria must be justified
  • All criteria are presented and defined within the methods section with the search strategy

Examples of Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria:

  • Date: generally the search for evidence in a scoping review is run for the entirety of the databases existence. However, it the review is being completed to update a previous study, the run date will begin when the last study ended. 
  • Exposure of Interest: (as designated in the research question) If the review is specifically interested in the outcome related to a specific exposure, only studies evaluating that exposure will be included within the review. 
  • Geographic location: Global, within the United States, urban or rural, colleges or universities, etc. 
  • Language: Commonly a review will limit the studies included to those written in English due to translation issues. 
  • Participants: (as designated in the research question) 
  • Reported outcomes: Objective outcomes specifically related to the research question
  • Setting: Clinical, hospital, lab, school, community, etc. 
  • Study design
  • Type of publication: Determines if the review will include only peer reviewed evidence, grey literature, dissertations, conference abstracts and papers, etc.

Choosing Databases and Grey Literature

Databases

A scoping review aims to review as much of the literature as possible to minimize bias. As such, it is recommended that at least 3 databases are searched for a scoping review. 

As PubMed/MEDLINE excludes newer journals and health sciences disciplines, additional databases must be used to minimize publication bias. A librarian can suggest additional databases relevant to your research topic. See below for a video demonstrating how to use the library website to find databases relevant to your research topic.

Grey Literature

Grey literature is a term used to describe all sources of research or research-related literature that exists outside of peer-reviewed, academic journal articles.

Examples of grey literature include: conference abstracts, presentations, proceedings; regulatory data; unpublished trial data; government publications; reports (such as white papers, working papers, and internal documentation); dissertations/theses; patents;  and policies & procedures.

Why Search Grey Literature?

  • To find information not available in traditional publication outlets
  • To reduce publication bias in your results
  • To get a complete picture of your research topic

How to Write a Scoping Review Protocol