By the same authors

From the same journal

PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Full text download(s)

Published copy (DOI)

Author(s)

  • Andrea C Tricco
  • Erin Lillie
  • Wasifa Zarin
  • Kelly K O'Brien
  • Heather Colquhoun
  • Danielle Levac
  • David Moher
  • Micah D J Peters
  • Tanya Horsley
  • Laura Weeks
  • Susanne Hempel
  • Elie A Akl
  • Christine Chang
  • Jessie McGowan
  • Lisa Hartling
  • Adrian Aldcroft
  • Michael G Wilson
  • Chantelle Garritty
  • Simon Lewin
  • Christina M Godfrey
  • Marilyn T Macdonald
  • Etienne V Langlois
  • Karla Soares-Weiser
  • Jo Moriarty
  • Tammy Clifford
  • Özge Tunçalp
  • Sharon E Straus

Department/unit(s)

Publication details

JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
DateAccepted/In press - 18 Jul 2018
DateE-pub ahead of print - 4 Sep 2018
DatePublished (current) - 2 Oct 2018
Issue number7
Volume169
Number of pages7
Pages (from-to)467-473
Early online date4/09/18
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.

Bibliographical note

© 2018 American College of Physicians. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

    Research areas

  • Journal Article

Discover related content

Find related publications, people, projects, datasets and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations