Q. Eileen Wafford: Hello, and welcome to conducting a scope review
Q. Eileen Wafford: in this class. We're going to define scope reviews.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Talk about the differences between scoping and systematic reviews.
Q. Eileen Wafford: When to choose a scope, review
Q. Eileen Wafford: the scope, review process
Q. Eileen Wafford: and reporting guidelines and protocol development.
Q. Eileen Wafford: There is a sculptor review guide that you can access by going 2, this link. or
Q. Eileen Wafford: through the library's homepage at
Q. Eileen Wafford: Galter, northwestern.edu.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Under research services
Q. Eileen Wafford: under research tools. we have altar guides.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and if you scroll down
Q. Eileen Wafford: under Systematic and Scoper reviews.
Q. Eileen Wafford: We have our link to the Scoper Review, Galter, Guide.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and access to the guide that contains most of the content.
Q. Eileen Wafford: if not all, that is covered in today's presentation.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So what is a Scoper review? A scope review is a type of knowledge, synthesis.
Q. Eileen Wafford: literature review that follows a systematic approach to mapping evidence on a topic
Q. Eileen Wafford: and identifying main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps.
Q. Eileen Wafford: This definition is very similar to the definition of a systematic review. We mentioned that sculpy view maps evidence
Q. Eileen Wafford: to identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. When it comes to the definition of a systematic review.
Q. Eileen Wafford: You are attempting to identify, appraise, and synthesize all the available evidence to answer a very specific research question.
Q. Eileen Wafford: A focused research question.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So some differences explained in this
Q. Eileen Wafford: chart includes. When it comes to a sculptory view. you can have one author, or you can have several authors.
Q. Eileen Wafford: whereas with a systematic review.
Q. Eileen Wafford: those projects are team based, and at a minimum you will have 2 authors.
Q. Eileen Wafford: The research questions or question for a scope review can be focused or broad, whereas
Q. Eileen Wafford: in a systematic review. Ideally, you should have a focused research question.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Your eligibility, criteria, your inclusion, exclusion, criteria, can be a little more flexible with the scope review, whereas your eligibility criteria with a systematic review is established at the start of the process and does not change
the same thing with your search strategy.
Q. Eileen Wafford: With a search strategy for a systematic review. It is established at the start of the process, and it really does not change. whereas with a scope review there is some flexibility, and you can always
Q. Eileen Wafford: go back and revise your search
Q. Eileen Wafford: because you're dealing with
Q. Eileen Wafford: often broader questions. When it comes to scope reviews, you often get larger results set
Q. Eileen Wafford: compared to systematic reviews, where you tend to get relatively fewer results.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Appraisal for a scope review is optional, whereas
Q. Eileen Wafford: with a systematic review you are expected to appraise all the articles that meet your inclusion criteria
Q. Eileen Wafford: when it comes to protocols and reporting guidelines. There is one protocol, or rather one reporting guideline for scope reviews which we'll look at later, called the Prisma Sc. R.
Q. Eileen Wafford: For systematic reviews. You have the prisma P,
Q. Eileen Wafford: which you use to develop your protocol, and then the prisma 2020 checklist which you will use to write up your systematic review.
Q. Eileen Wafford: The analysis for sculpt reviews tend to be more overview and thematic, whereas your analysis for systematic reviews tend to be based on critically appraised
Q. Eileen Wafford: formal synthesis.
Q. Eileen Wafford: You may wonder when to consider a scope review
Q. Eileen Wafford: some indicators. The scope of review is or might be, the right review for your
Q. Eileen Wafford: project topic
Q. Eileen Wafford: is that your goal is to clarify or examine key concepts, topics or areas.
Q. Eileen Wafford: If you're looking to conduct a landscape or of an environmental scan of a topic
Q. Eileen Wafford: or identify knowledge gaps
Q. Eileen Wafford: for your research question tend to be broader in nature, or have multi- parts to it.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Those are all indicators that you may want to consider a scope or review
Q. Eileen Wafford: along those lines.
Q. Eileen Wafford: If you're not sure that you want to invest in doing a full out
Q. Eileen Wafford: critical appraisal of all the included studies which is required for systematic reviews. You may decide to first do a scope review to see if it's
Q. Eileen Wafford: feasible, or if you want to pursue a systematic review.
Q. Eileen Wafford: if it's impractical to conduct risk of bias assessments on all the studies that meet your inclusion criteria. That's another indicator that a scope review may be the right review for you.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and that's usually because you may be incorporating, and you're often incorporating many different study designs. And again, you're getting these larger results sets where it may not be feasible to
Q. Eileen Wafford: do risk of bias assessment on all the articles that meet your inclusion criteria.
Q. Eileen Wafford: If you're thinking about a scope review.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Sometimes a systematic review might be the better option for you. So
Q. Eileen Wafford: here are some key indicators that a systematic review might be right for you.
Q. Eileen Wafford: If you're trying to confirm current practice or address any variation, or identify new practices.
Q. Eileen Wafford: If you want to address the feasibility, appropriateness, meaningfulness, or effectiveness of a certain treatment or practice.
Q. Eileen Wafford: or identify and investigate conflicting results
Q. Eileen Wafford: or produce statements to guide decision making.
Q. Eileen Wafford: These are all points that indicate
Q. Eileen Wafford: that systematic review may be right for you, because these things usually require
Q. Eileen Wafford: risk of bias, assessment. to achieve those goals.
Q. Eileen Wafford: you may wonder, do scope reviews get published.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and the answer to that is, yes.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So for the remainder of this class. We're going to
Q. Eileen Wafford: put our our topic into context using this example.
Q. Eileen Wafford: And the example is a published scope. Review titled A scope review on the concept of position carrying.
Q. Eileen Wafford: And you can see just by some of the key words in the objectives
looking at objective number one to identify existing research
Q. Eileen Wafford: definitions, frameworks, and conceptual model of care and caring among medical practitioners practitioners.
Q. Eileen Wafford: You can see just from that objective objective many of the key words, the indicators that this research topic
Q. Eileen Wafford: is appropriate for a scope review, or rather a scope review, is appropriate for this research topic.
Q. Eileen Wafford: When it comes to the sculptor review process.
Q. Eileen Wafford: There are some key sources that really guide and shape
Q. Eileen Wafford: current scope review practices.
Q. Eileen Wafford: One of those key sources is scoping studies towards a methodological framework by Arc and O'malley.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Another key source is the JBI. Manual for Evidence synthesis, which is
Q. Eileen Wafford: pretty much the equivalent of Cochrane for system. Ag. Review, Jbi. Is for scope review. So check out those sources. If you would like to learn more about scope reviews.
Q. Eileen Wafford: you can break down the scope, review process into 5 steps.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Step one, identify the research question or questions.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Step 2. Identify relevant studies.
Q. Eileen Wafford: 3. Study selection for charting the data and then 5, collating, summarizing and reporting results
Q. Eileen Wafford: when it comes to step one identifying the research question.
Q. Eileen Wafford: This is a key step, because the research question shapes all aspects of a scope review. You may be familiar with the pico framework, which is very commonly used in many systemic reviews. However, Pico tend to be
Q. Eileen Wafford: better suited for therapy or interventional questions.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Many scope reviews are not therapy or intervention related. So there's another
Q. Eileen Wafford: framework that
Q. Eileen Wafford: tend to be very, very useful in shaping
Q. Eileen Wafford: and identifying key concepts. That framework is the Pcc. Can you stand for your population problem
Q. Eileen Wafford: or patient of interest? C. Is a concept related to your population that you would like to learn more about.
Q. Eileen Wafford: And then the other C for context is, what else about your population and the concept that you would like to discover
Q. Eileen Wafford: through your review so it could be a setting. It could be some type of intervention. It's very, very flexible.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So our example scope review a scope review on the concept of position, hearing
Q. Eileen Wafford: their research question was, What is the state of science around physician caring? And how has it been defined and conceptualized thus far?
Q. Eileen Wafford: And they use the Pcc framework to identify key elements of their research. Question.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Step 2, identify relevant studies
Q. Eileen Wafford: as with a systematic review. If you're conducting a scope review. Consider
Q. Eileen Wafford: searching more than one source. Jbi recommends 3 sources. However, there's a lot of flexibility
Q. Eileen Wafford: when you develop a scope reviewed search strategy, your search strategy should be comprehensive.
Q. Eileen Wafford: In addition to considering multiple sources.
Q. Eileen Wafford: consider a variety of evidence. So you may want to consider great literature.
Q. Eileen Wafford: conference proceedings. clinical trial registry information
Q. Eileen Wafford: because the search strategy development process
tend to be iterative.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Consider. And you should document the changes that you apply to your search. So document document document.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So when it comes to identifying relevant studies, our example.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Scope review provides a little description on the sources they search, as well as an example of their final search string
Q. Eileen Wafford: that they applied in pubmed.
Q. Eileen Wafford: When it comes to step 3 study selection.
Q. Eileen Wafford: You want to select
Q. Eileen Wafford: studies based on your eligibility criteria, and you can consider using screening tools that are used in systematic reviews. such as covenants, which is something your team will pay for. Rayon or Rayan is free.
Q. Eileen Wafford: And there's a other variety of tools out there. These are the 2 that go to librarians are most common with, and
Q. Eileen Wafford: teams that we work with tend to use those tools. These tools are not supported by galter, library, or northwestern.
Q. Eileen Wafford: so your team would be responsible for
Q. Eileen Wafford: setting that up. If you decide to use. Use one that pay costs.
Q. Eileen Wafford: you would be responsible for absorbing that fee.
Q. Eileen Wafford: If you are interested in learning more about using these tools first go. Brain view. First, corporate reviews consider attending one of our
Q. Eileen Wafford: conducting a systematic review part 2 tools and resources class, because we talk about those those tools, and they are applicable to scope reviews.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So then, we have study selection
Q. Eileen Wafford: for our example scope, review.
Q. Eileen Wafford: They use RAM to pilot, screen the
Q. Eileen Wafford: screening process, and then they use covenants to do the full title, abstract title, abstract screening.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and they explain their their approach and their manuscript.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So when it comes to step 4 charting the data. There is no data extraction,
Q. Eileen Wafford: standardized form. And we say, charting the data. But in systemic review world, we call that data extraction. So it's okay to call it data extraction. They're the exact same process where you're just extracting data from the articles that meet your inclusion criteria, and you'll create a form.
Q. Eileen Wafford: The form should be, of course, individualized.
Q. Eileen Wafford: You want to pilot the form, so test the form, using articles that you already know, meet your inclusion criteria, and then refine. The form as needed
Q. Eileen Wafford: on this screen is example from Jbi is a template
Q. Eileen Wafford: that you can adapt, but of course, you should also revise it to meet your your research questions, objectives and needs.
Q. Eileen Wafford: I will say, many forms.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Teams often use an excel, excel spreadsheet, and we talk about data charting, or rather data extraction in that part 2 class, the systematic review.
Q. Eileen Wafford: part 2 tools and resources.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So our example scope review. They explained their data extraction process.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and what they plan, or rather planned on extracting from the articles
Q. Eileen Wafford: that they were, that they were going to synthesize and ended up synthesizing zinc.
Q. Eileen Wafford: our last step
Q. Eileen Wafford: step 5, collating, summarizing, and reporting results. This is where you synthesize the data you extracted.
Q. Eileen Wafford: What do you want to include
Q. Eileen Wafford: include information that aligns with your objectives, that address your research question and
Q. Eileen Wafford: address your Pcc. Or Pico, which you'll do naturally, if you're addressing your objectives and research questions
Q. Eileen Wafford: or question.
Q. Eileen Wafford: You also want to include information about the sources ever, or rather your search
Q. Eileen Wafford: or searches, depending on how many you conduct, so that information will include search results
Q. Eileen Wafford: as well as
Q. Eileen Wafford: the results of the selection process. So after you found articles, how many did you exclude during the title? Abstract phase. And how many did you exclude after full text review.
Q. Eileen Wafford: when it comes to the sources, include
Q. Eileen Wafford: or consider, including a description of the sources that did meet your including criteria, of course, include references.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and also consider using your Pcc. To help you with
Q. Eileen Wafford: reporting key information.
Q. Eileen Wafford: You'll often see
Q. Eileen Wafford: the information presented in descriptive text diagrams.
The prism of flow diagrams used for systematic reviews can also be adapted for scope reviews as well as tables.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So in the next few slides. We're just going to see how our sample example
Q. Eileen Wafford: scope review how they collated summarize and reported results. And you'll see a combination of different modes of disseminating, disseminating this this information in their manuscript.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Yeah. Tax.
Q. Eileen Wafford: you'll see tables
Q. Eileen Wafford: and the tables will map to their Pcc
Q. Eileen Wafford: additional tables that map to information that reflect their Pcc. And objectives.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and they also adapted a prisma flow diagram
Q. Eileen Wafford: to show the flow of information of data
Q. Eileen Wafford: throughout their scope review process.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and they describe that
Q. Eileen Wafford: flow and text as well.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So there's a lot
Q. Eileen Wafford: the report. There's a lot to remember a great tool to help you structure and manage your scope. Review is the prisma for scope. Review, checklist.
Q. Eileen Wafford: This is a 22 item checklist. It captures key elements of a scope and review, and you can also use it to develop your protocol.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So in developing your protocol, consider
Q. Eileen Wafford: identifying before you start your scope, review your title. So items one.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and then your plans for items 13, or rather 3 to 13. So what's your rationale? What's your objectives? Protocol registration? Once you're done with with your protocol. Consider
Q. Eileen Wafford: registering it, just making it publicly available.
Q. Eileen Wafford: Eligibility, criteria, information sources. We talked about that. What databases will you be searching? What's your search strategy going into this.
Q. Eileen Wafford: your selection of sources. How do you plan on
Q. Eileen Wafford: data data, charting, charting the data? They're just asking you to identify your plan.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So what are the data items that you'll be extracting
Q. Eileen Wafford: if you plan to critical critical appraisal, which is not expected for scope reviews. But some teams find that
Q. Eileen Wafford: it's appropriate for their school review. Describe
Q. Eileen Wafford: your approach to critical appraisal. And how do you plan on synthesizing the results?
Q. Eileen Wafford: The data that you extracted
Q. Eileen Wafford: many times. It's a narrative synthesis. It's thematic as an overview. So it's okay to use those words to describe your approach to synthesis.
Q. Eileen Wafford: I would encourage you to visit the statement paper.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So this is a document that describe each of these checklist items. It includes a rationale as well as an example
Q. Eileen Wafford: as well as check out the tip sheets.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So the tip sheets is a wonderful
Q. Eileen Wafford: online tool.
Q. Eileen Wafford: If you scroll down, if you just click on it, it's like the statement paper, where it gives you an example of
Q. Eileen Wafford: the checklist item also tells you, the rationale and the description of like what should be included in that
Q. Eileen Wafford: when reporting that item. So in the title.
Q. Eileen Wafford: it encouraged and recommends that you include the term Sculptor Review in your title.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So check out those tip cheats. They include like tips that
Q. Eileen Wafford: you know you may not think of at the time.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So we talked about registering your protocol. Consider registering your protocol because it encourages transparency. It helps you claim your topic
Q. Eileen Wafford: hopefully. That prevents competing reviews because,
Q. Eileen Wafford: Those teams should have done their due diligence as you and look for reviews that already address your question or questions is also
Q. Eileen Wafford: a checklist item.
Q. Eileen Wafford: You can register
Q. Eileen Wafford: your protocol through several sources, including open science framework, Osf prism.
Q. Eileen Wafford: If you really really invested in your in your protocol you can also publish your protocols. Some journals, including assistant Mag reviews. Bmjopen, Jbi. Evidence synthesis, they will publish protocols.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So that will result in 2 publications. For one research project. At this time Prospero does not accept protocols or scope reviews.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So in our example. Scope Review. We see the team explain that they registered in digital hub, which is now Northwestern's prisma or prism.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and I registered their protocol. That is.
Q. Eileen Wafford: And so I just wanted to leave off with
Q. Eileen Wafford: note that Galter Library can support some scope review teams. Sometimes a team's question or their timeline may not work with our full collaboration model.
Q. Eileen Wafford: But that's something you can discuss with your liaison librarian. So please feel free to reach out to your liaison librarian. If you're interested in pursuing a
Q. Eileen Wafford: scope review. just note
Q. Eileen Wafford: that teams that collaborate with a Golter librarian usually take on average 14 months to complete a scope review. So if you don't have 14 months
Q. Eileen Wafford: still reach out to your liaison librarian, and that person can talk to. You can provide a level of support. That may not be our full collaboration, but can help you with the process.
Q. Eileen Wafford: And with that here are some additional guides that can help you with conducting a scope review.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and we have some more examples.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and these are scope reviews published
Q. Eileen Wafford: with galter librarians as co-authors.
Q. Eileen Wafford: and then some references to documents that help with the development of this class.
Q. Eileen Wafford: So thank you. Once again contact your liaison librarian for more information.