How to Complete a Scoping Review - Final 04252021

Welcome to “How to Create a Scoping

Review.” Thank you for joining me.

My name is Bebe Makena and

I am an Occupational Therapist.

I also happen to be completing

my clinical doctorate in occupational

therapy. A requirement of my doctoral

program is the completion of a final

capstone project.

Mine is a scoping review.

Very briefly, a scoping review

is a type of literature review

that looks for existing evidence

that shows whether or not a specific

type of treatment will work for a

specific type of concern.

My intention with this lesson

is to teach other students

who are just beginning in their

journey towards completing a

scoping review, how to do so.

This lesson is a broad overview

of the process.

Another type of literature review

is a systematic review. It attempts

to answer the same question as a

scoping review, but with greater rigor.

A systematic review team may conduct

additional statistical analyses of the

outcome measures used within the

research articles they include in their

reviews. I have previously been a part of

one of these teams. This prior experience

helped me to prepare for completing my

current scoping review. You may also

benefit from participating in another

team’s review. Step one, then, is to

see if any opportunities exist for

you to build your experience.

Step two is to decide on your

capstone topic.

It is possible that your topic has

enough existing research for you

to go forward towards conducting

a research study.

If there is not enough evidence to

justify a study, though, you will

want to help lay the foundation

for future research. A scoping review

is a good first step.

Step three is to improve your

understanding of the required scoping

review styles and elements. Even if you

have participated in one in the past,

the criteria may have changed, or the

nature of your scoping review may be

different from the one prior. For example,

you may be focused more on showing

that there is or is not a gap in

available information.

Or, you may be trying to dig

deeply to prove or disprove the

efficacy of a very specific type of

intervention.

If the first, then you may confine your

research to electronic databases.

If the second, you may dive into paper

journals and articles listed in reference

sections as well as the electronic

databases.

Key scoping review elements often

include philosophical grounding and a

framework to guide you. Philosophical

grounding pertains to a professional

philosophy or model that will underpin

your work.

For example, I used the Model of Human

Occupation also known as MOHO.

I used MOHO to help explain why my

research question was important,

and to see if MOHO elements were

present in the included studies.

MOHO is a keystone philosophy in

occupational therapy. Knowing if the

MOHO elements are present in research

helps to identify if or how it is being

used. You may have a similar interest

in your profession.

The framework you choose will

help you identify the questions you

should answer in your scoping review.

I chose the preferred reporting items for

systematic review and meta-analysis

also known as PRISMA.

This is a widely respected framework

that promotes consistent approaches

across literature reviews so that the

quality of each review is as high

as possible and so that future reviews

can be compared well to past reviews.

Common framework criteria include

completion of background research

and specific formatting requirements,

in addition to other criteria.

Background research includes an

examination of existing literature

related to your topic that helps to

explain why your topic is important.

For example, I was interested in whether

or not sensory integration methods

would be effective in treating

posttraumatic stress disorder,

also known as PTSD, in adults.

My background information discussed

how many adults are affected by PTSD,

how debilitating the symptoms can be,

the neurology involved in PTSD, and

how similar that neurology is to brain

regions impacted by sensory integration.

Other criteria defined by your framework

can be extensive. With PRISMA, I needed

to address concerns related to conflicts

of interest, how the data from the

results would be assessed, what articles

would be included or excluded, and how

I would search for the articles,

among several other items.

Whatever framework you choose,

you will need to track each stage of your

work and collaboration with others to

prove that you were rigorous and ethical.

I found a simple Excel spreadsheet

useful for doing this. You will also

benefit from consulting with a librarian

who can help you define your search terms

and identify the best databases to

explore.

Once you have addressed all of the

criteria, focus on refining your

formatting. There may be specific style

guidelines dictating how a table should

look, how to align your headers, if you

need to add a key to define abbreviated

terms, and so on.

Take one final look over your work

to see if you have answered all of the

criteria well, have formatted all items

correctly, and have synthesized your

information appropriately. It is very

common to miss something. It might seem

small to you, but it may cause a delay in

your capstone completion, or potential

publication, if it is not addressed.

For example, I discovered an updated set

of professional guidelines from the

American Occupational Therapy Association

that I found I needed to incorporate.

This set of criteria was very helpful

in assessing bias correctly within

my scoping review.

Once done, your final step is to

submit your scoping review to your

committee and prepare for your defense.

Your committee will review your draft and

provide insights to you before your

defense. This is very helpful as it

allows you to make any final revisions

that will boost your chances

for passing your defense and,

ultimately, your doctoral program.

Thank you for tuning into this lesson.

I hope you have found it useful.