Scoping reviews in medical education: A scoping review

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to characterize the extent, range, and nature of scoping reviews published in core medical education journals. In so doing, the authors identify areas for improvement in the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews, and highlight opportunities for future research.MethodThe authors searched PubMed for scoping reviews published between 1999 through April 2020 in 14 medical education journals. From each review, the authors extracted and summarized key bibliometric data, the rationales given for conducting a scoping review, the research questions, and key reporting elements as described in the PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. Rationales and research questions were mapped to the reasons for conducting a scoping review, as described by Arksey and O’Malley.ResultsOne hundred and one scoping reviews were included. On average 10.1 scoping reviews (MED=4, SD=13.08) were published annually with the most reviews published in 2019 (n=42) in 13 of the included 14 journals reviewed. Academic Medicine published the most scoping reviews (n=28) overall. Authors described multiple reasons for undertaking scoping reviews, including to: summarize and disseminate research findings (n=77); examine the extent, range, and nature of research activity in a given area (n=74); and to analyze an emerging topic or heterogenous literature base (n=46). In 11 reviews there was alignment between the rationales for the scoping review and the stated research questions. No review addressed all elements of the PRISMA-ScR, with only a minority of authors publishing a protocol (n=2) or including stakeholders (n=20). Authors identified several shortcomings of scoping review methodology, including being unable to critically assess the included studies.ConclusionsMedical educators are increasingly conducting scoping reviews with a desire to characterize the literature on a topic. There is room for improvement in the reporting of scoping reviews, including the alignment of research questions, the creation and publishing of protocols, and the inclusion of external stakeholders in published works.

Professional identity formation within longitudinal integrated clerkships: A scoping review

“…Developing an identity as a caring physician has been a prominent focus of research regarding identity development within LICs. The term ‘ethic of caring’ has been applied to describe how medical students within LICs develop an identity that is moral in nature and guided by patient's best interests 1,32,50 . Evans et al comment that students within LIC models perceive an expanded scope to their role and are more likely to describe themselves as ‘caregivers, advocates, and mentors’ than students in block clerkships, who more typically describe themselves as ‘learners, visitors, or diagnosticians’, 44 highlighting the increased focus on care within LIC‐afforded professional identities.…”

“…Scoping reviews examine the extent, nature and range of research activity concerning a topic or area of interest 32 . Guided by an exploratory research question, they offer a way to analyse emerging or nebulous research areas 32 .…”

“…31 This barrier applies to LIC re- Scoping reviews examine the extent, nature and range of research activity concerning a topic or area of interest. 32 Guided by an exploratory research question, they offer a way to analyse emerging or nebulous research areas. 32 Given the emerging nature of LIC scholarship (indeed, no previous literature reviews appraise identity formation within LICs), and the oft-nebulous nature of identity research, a scoping review was selected to discern what is known regarding identity development within LICs, evaluate the influencing factors within the model, and map areas for future study.…”

Emotion in remediation: A scoping review of the medical education literature

“…Sixth, some guidelines 48 suggest optional expert consultation to check the findings of scoping reviews, which we did not do in this review but could represent an important further step in studying emotion in remediation. Seventh, we did not use a registered review protocol; though uncommonly used for scoping reviews 164 and arguably impeding the scoping review's iterative and reflective process, 165 registered protocols may be helpful in avoiding duplicative work and improving transparency 165 . Finally, there are numerous affective factors in addition to emotion, such as motivation and insight, that affect learning; these were outside the scope of this review but offer further areas for study to improve learning during remediation and may have particular applicability in ongoing work related to self‐regulated learning and control‐value theory in remediation.…”

Tea for Sport and Fitness: A Scoping Review

“…Scoping reviews are increasingly being used to map the breadth and depth of emerging topics [19] which in this instance was tea drinking in relation to aspects of sports and fitness. The Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review guide (2020) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Scoping Review extension (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines and 22-item scale were applied [20,21].…”