Interpretation of the PRISMA extension for scoping review (PRISMA-ScR)_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

QIU Ruxia ^1,2,3 ,  GU Yanhong ^1,2,3

1. School of Nursing, Fudan University, Shanghai 200030, P. R. China;
2. Department of Nursing, Shanghai Fifth People’s Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 201100, P. R. China;
3. Center for Community Health Research of Fudan University, Shanghai 201100, P. R. China;

Corresponding author：

GU Yanhong, Email: reddy_gu@163.com

Keywords：

PRISMA-ScR; Scope review; Interpretation

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.202203042

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

The purpose of a scoping review is to help researchers gain a systematic and comprehensive understanding of the current state of development in a field. In this paper, we explained the background and core contents of the scoping review report specification checklist (PRISMA extension for scoping reviews, PRISMA-ScR) and interpreted each item with examples to guide domestic scholars to write scoping reviews and improve their reporting quality.

Citation： QIU Ruxia, GU Yanhong. Interpretation of the PRISMA extension for scoping review (PRISMA-ScR). Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2022, 22(6): 722-730. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.202203042 Copy

1.	Colquhoun HL, Levac D, O'Brien KK, et al. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol, 2014, 67(12): 1291-1294.
2.	王喜益, 叶志弘, 汤磊雯. 范围综述在护理领域的应用进展. 中华护理杂志, 2019, 54(8): 1259-1263.
3.	Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Social Research Methodology, 2005, 8(1): 19-32.
4.	Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2016, 16(15): 1-10.
5.	Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med, 2018, 169(7): 467-473.
6.	McInnes MD, Bossuyt PM. Pitfalls of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in imaging research. Radiology, 2015, 277(1): 13-21.
7.	Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med, 2011, 155(8): 529-536.
8.	Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, et al. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med, 2010, 7(2): e1000217.
9.	Lenzen SA, Daniëls R, van Bokhoven MA, et al. Disentangling self-management goal setting and action planning: a scoping review. PLoS One, 2017, 12(11): e0188822.
10.	Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, et al. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc, 2015, 13(3): 141-146.
11.	Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation science, 2010, 5: 69.
12.	Beller EM, Glasziou PP, Altman DG, et al. PRISMA for abstracts: reporting systematic reviews in journal and conference abstracts. PLoS Med, 2013, 10(4): e1001419.
13.	Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, et al. CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med, 2008, 5(1): e20.
14.	Haynes RB, Mulrow CD, Huth EJ, et al. More informative abstracts revisited. Ann Intern Med, 1990, 113(1): 69-76.
15.	Tricco AC, Zarin W, Ghassemi M, et al. Same family, different species: methodological conduct and quality varies according to purpose for five types of knowledge synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol, 2018, 96: 133-142.
16.	Richardson WS, Wilson MC, Nishikawa J, et al. The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions. ACP J Club, 1995, 123(3): A12-13.
17.	Suchodolska G, Senkus E. Mobile applications for early breast cancer chemotherapy-related symptoms reporting and management: a scoping review. Cancer Treat Rev, 2022, 105: 102364.
18.	Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 2021, 372: n71.
19.	高亚, 刘明, 杨珂璐, 等. 系统评价报告规范: PRISMA 2020与PRISMA 2009的对比分析与实例解读. 中国循证医学杂志, 2021, 21(5): 606-616.
20.	Lockwood C, Tricco AC. Preparing scoping reviews for publication using methodological guides and reporting standards. Nurs Health Sci, 2020, 22(1): 1-4.
21.	McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, et al. PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J Clin Epidemiol, 2016, 75: 40-46.
22.	Rombouts SA, Conigrave J, Louie E, et al. Evidence-based models of care for the treatment of alcohol use disorder in primary health care settings: protocol for systematic review. Syst Rev, 2019, 8(1): 275.
23.	Rethlefsen ML, Kirtley S, Waffenschmidt S, et al. PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc, 2021, 109(2): 174-200.
24.	Higgins JPT, López-López JA, Becker BJ, et al. Synthesising quantitative evidence in systematic reviews of complex health interventions. BMJ Glob Health, 2019, 4(Suppl 1): e000858.
25.	吕小东, 沈锡宾. 利用文献计量学方法分析国外学术出版领域近5年研究进展. 中国科技期刊研究, 2013, 24(6): 1044-1048.

1. Colquhoun HL, Levac D, O'Brien KK, et al. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol, 2014, 67(12): 1291-1294.
2. 王喜益, 叶志弘, 汤磊雯. 范围综述在护理领域的应用进展. 中华护理杂志, 2019, 54(8): 1259-1263.
3. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Social Research Methodology, 2005, 8(1): 19-32.
4. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2016, 16(15): 1-10.
5. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med, 2018, 169(7): 467-473.
6. McInnes MD, Bossuyt PM. Pitfalls of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in imaging research. Radiology, 2015, 277(1): 13-21.
7. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med, 2011, 155(8): 529-536.
8. Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, et al. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med, 2010, 7(2): e1000217.
9. Lenzen SA, Daniëls R, van Bokhoven MA, et al. Disentangling self-management goal setting and action planning: a scoping review. PLoS One, 2017, 12(11): e0188822.
10. Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, et al. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc, 2015, 13(3): 141-146.
11. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation science, 2010, 5: 69.
12. Beller EM, Glasziou PP, Altman DG, et al. PRISMA for abstracts: reporting systematic reviews in journal and conference abstracts. PLoS Med, 2013, 10(4): e1001419.
13. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, et al. CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med, 2008, 5(1): e20.
14. Haynes RB, Mulrow CD, Huth EJ, et al. More informative abstracts revisited. Ann Intern Med, 1990, 113(1): 69-76.
15. Tricco AC, Zarin W, Ghassemi M, et al. Same family, different species: methodological conduct and quality varies according to purpose for five types of knowledge synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol, 2018, 96: 133-142.
16. Richardson WS, Wilson MC, Nishikawa J, et al. The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions. ACP J Club, 1995, 123(3): A12-13.
17. Suchodolska G, Senkus E. Mobile applications for early breast cancer chemotherapy-related symptoms reporting and management: a scoping review. Cancer Treat Rev, 2022, 105: 102364.
18. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 2021, 372: n71.
19. 高亚, 刘明, 杨珂璐, 等. 系统评价报告规范: PRISMA 2020与PRISMA 2009的对比分析与实例解读. 中国循证医学杂志, 2021, 21(5): 606-616.
20. Lockwood C, Tricco AC. Preparing scoping reviews for publication using methodological guides and reporting standards. Nurs Health Sci, 2020, 22(1): 1-4.
21. McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, et al. PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J Clin Epidemiol, 2016, 75: 40-46.
22. Rombouts SA, Conigrave J, Louie E, et al. Evidence-based models of care for the treatment of alcohol use disorder in primary health care settings: protocol for systematic review. Syst Rev, 2019, 8(1): 275.
23. Rethlefsen ML, Kirtley S, Waffenschmidt S, et al. PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc, 2021, 109(2): 174-200.
24. Higgins JPT, López-López JA, Becker BJ, et al. Synthesising quantitative evidence in systematic reviews of complex health interventions. BMJ Glob Health, 2019, 4(Suppl 1): e000858.
25. 吕小东, 沈锡宾. 利用文献计量学方法分析国外学术出版领域近5年研究进展. 中国科技期刊研究, 2013, 24(6): 1044-1048.

Previous Article
Meta-epidemiology: origin and development
Next Article
Interpretation of reporting checklist (CONSORT-ROUTINE 2021) for trials using cohorts and routinely collected data

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Interpretation of the PRISMA extension for scoping review (PRISMA-ScR)

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content