One connector, four scholarly indexes, real DOIs and legal free PDFs. Works in Claude and ChatGPT.
Paste it into Claude or ChatGPT as a custom connector. 3-day free trial.
Micah D.J. Peters, Casey Marnie, Heather L. Colquhoun, Chantelle Garritty, Susanne Hempel, Tanya Horsley, Étienne V Langlois, Erin Lillie, Kelly Kathleen O’Brien, Özge Tunçalp and 3 more
Scoping reviews are an increasingly common approach to evidence synthesis with a growing suite of methodological guidance and resources to assist review authors with their planning, conduct and reporting. The latest guidance for scoping reviews includes the JBI methodology and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Extension for Scoping Reviews. This paper provides readers with a brief update regarding ongoing work to enhance and improve the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews as well as information regarding the future steps in scoping review methods development. The purpose of this paper is to provide readers with a concise source of information regarding the difference between scoping reviews and other review types, the reasons for undertaking scoping reviews, and an update on methodological guidance for the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews.Despite available guidance, some publications use the term 'scoping review' without clear consideration of available reporting and methodological tools. Selection of the most appropriate review type for the stated research objectives or questions, standardised use of methodological approaches and terminology in scoping reviews, clarity and consistency of reporting and ensuring that the reporting and presentation of the results clearly addresses the review's objective(s) and question(s) are critical components for improving the rigour of scoping reviews.Rigourous, high-quality scoping reviews should clearly follow up to date methodological guidance and reporting criteria. Stakeholder engagement is one area where further work could occur to enhance integration of consultation with the results of evidence syntheses and to support effective knowledge translation. Scoping review methodology is evolving as a policy and decision-making tool. Ensuring the integrity of scoping reviews by adherence to up-to-date reporting standards is integral to supporting well-informed decision-making.
Formatted from the source metadata, not typed by hand. For a whole reference list, use the citation generator or ask your assistant through Find Research.
Peters, M. D., Marnie, C., Colquhoun, H. L., Garritty, C., Hempel, S., Horsley, T., Langlois, É. V., Lillie, E., O’Brien, K. K., Tunçalp, Ö., Wilson, M. G., Zarin, W., & Tricco, A. C. (2021). Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), 263. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3
Peters, Micah D.J., et al. "Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application." Systematic Reviews, vol. 10, no. 1, 2021, pp. 263, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3.
Peters, Micah D.J., Casey Marnie, Heather L. Colquhoun, Chantelle Garritty, Susanne Hempel, Tanya Horsley, Étienne V Langlois, et al. "Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application." Systematic Reviews 10, no. 1 (2021): 263. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3.
Peters M. D., Marnie C., Colquhoun H. L. [и др.] Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application // Systematic Reviews. — 2021. — Vol. 10, № 1. — P. 263. — URL: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3
@article{peters2021scoping,
title = {{Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application}},
author = {Micah D.J. Peters and Casey Marnie and Heather L. Colquhoun and Chantelle Garritty and Susanne Hempel and Tanya Horsley and Étienne V Langlois and Erin Lillie and Kelly Kathleen O’Brien and Özge Tunçalp and Michael G. Wilson and Wasifa Zarin and Andrea C. Tricco},
journal = {Systematic Reviews},
year = {2021},
volume = {10},
number = {1},
pages = {263},
doi = {10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3}
}TY - JOUR AU - Peters, Micah D.J. AU - Marnie, Casey AU - Colquhoun, Heather L. AU - Garritty, Chantelle AU - Hempel, Susanne AU - Horsley, Tanya AU - Langlois, Étienne V AU - Lillie, Erin AU - O’Brien, Kelly Kathleen AU - Tunçalp, Özge AU - Wilson, Michael G. AU - Zarin, Wasifa AU - Tricco, Andrea C. TI - Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application JO - Systematic Reviews VL - 10 IS - 1 SP - 263 PY - 2021 DA - 2021/10/08 DO - 10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3 UR - https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3 ER -
Add Find Research to Claude or ChatGPT and ask in plain language. The assistant reads this record, finds the papers around it and cites only what it actually found:
Setup takes about a minute: add the connector, then start the free trial.
Record from OpenAlex; open-access location from Unpaywall and the indexes. Find Research links only to legal copies.