Literature DB >> 34550586

Systematic Versus Rapid Versus Scoping Reviews.

Zachary Bouck1,2, Sharon E Straus2,3,4, Andrea C Tricco5,6,7,8.   

Abstract

The following chapter highlights the methodological similarities/differences and strengths/weaknesses between systematic reviews and two common alternative approaches for knowledge synthesis: rapid reviews and scoping reviews. In doing so, the intention is to provide readers with guidance in determining whether a rapid or scoping review may be more appropriate for addressing the research question(s) and objective(s) of the review team and knowledge users versus a traditional systematic review. To supplement this discussion, this chapter presents widely adopted tools and resources to facilitate the conduct and reporting of both rapid and scoping reviews.
© 2022. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Knowledge synthesis; Mapping reviews; Rapid review; Rapid systematic review; Scoping review; Scoping studies; Systematic scoping reviews

Mesh：

Year:  2022        PMID： 34550586     DOI： 10.1007/978-1-0716-1566-9_6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Methods Mol Biol        ISSN： 1064-3745


  8 in total

1.  The art and science of knowledge synthesis.

Authors:  Andrea C Tricco; Jennifer Tetzlaff; David Moher
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews.

Authors:  Micah D J Peters; Christina M Godfrey; Hanan Khalil; Patricia McInerney; Deborah Parker; Cassia Baldini Soares
Journal:  Int J Evid Based Healthc       Date:  2015-09

3.  In no uncertain terms: the importance of a defined objective in scoping reviews.

Authors:  Micah D J Peters
Journal:  JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep       Date:  2016-02

Review 4.  Knowledge synthesis methods for integrating qualitative and quantitative data: a scoping review reveals poor operationalization of the methodological steps.

Authors:  Andrea C Tricco; Jesmin Antony; Charlene Soobiah; Monika Kastner; Heather MacDonald; Elise Cogo; Erin Lillie; Judy Tran; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2016-02-15       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 5.  A scoping review of rapid review methods.

Authors:  Andrea C Tricco; Jesmin Antony; Wasifa Zarin; Lisa Strifler; Marco Ghassemi; John Ivory; Laure Perrier; Brian Hutton; David Moher; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2015-09-16       Impact factor: 8.775

6.  A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews.

Authors:  Andrea C Tricco; Erin Lillie; Wasifa Zarin; Kelly O'Brien; Heather Colquhoun; Monika Kastner; Danielle Levac; Carmen Ng; Jane Pearson Sharpe; Katherine Wilson; Meghan Kenny; Rachel Warren; Charlotte Wilson; Henry T Stelfox; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences.

Authors:  Zachary Munn; Cindy Stern; Edoardo Aromataris; Craig Lockwood; Zoe Jordan
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach.

Authors:  Zachary Munn; Micah D J Peters; Cindy Stern; Catalin Tufanaru; Alexa McArthur; Edoardo Aromataris
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 4.615
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.