Review
What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.02.010Get rights and content

Abstract

Background

Scoping studies are increasingly undertaken as distinct activities. The interpretation, methodology and expectations of scoping are highly variable. This suggests that conceptually, scoping is a poorly defined ambiguous term. The distinction between scoping as an integral preliminary process in the development of a research proposal or a formative, methodologically rigorous activity in its own right has not been extensively examined.

Aims

The aim of this review is to explore the nature and status of scoping studies within the nursing literature and develop a working definition to ensure consistency in the future use of scoping as a research related activity.

Design

This paper follows an interpretative scoping review methodology.

Data sources

An explicit systematic search strategy included literary and web-based key word searches and advice from key researchers. Electronic sources included bibliographic and national research register databases and a general browser.

Results

The scoping studies varied widely in terms of intent, procedural and methodological rigor. An atheoretical stance was common although explicit conceptual clarification and development of a topic was limited. Four different levels of inquiry ranging from preliminary descriptive surveys to more substantive conceptual approaches were conceptualised. These levels reflected differing dimensional distinctions in which some activities constitute research whereas in others the scoping activities appear to fall outside the remit of research. Reconnaissance emerges as a common synthesising construct to explain the purpose of scoping.

Conclusions

Scoping studies in relation to nursing are embryonic and continue to evolve. Its main strengths lie in its ability to extract the essence of a diverse body of evidence giving it meaning and significance that is both developmental and intellectually creative. As with other approaches to research and evidence synthesis a more standardized approach is required.

Introduction

As nursing matures as an evidence-based profession it is contingent on the profession to build its research capacity and capability, and maintain a diligence and consistency in the language of its research activity. Across the literature clear definitions of scoping are limited. It may be assumed that for most researchers it is a term generally synonymous with preliminary investigative processes that identify the range and nature of existing evidence and help in the formulation of a research question(s) and the development of research proposals. However, there is an extensive and international body of literature originating from a diverse range of academic disciplines and industrial backgrounds, that present scoping as a more formative, substantial and stand alone activity. These cover a broad range of purposes and investigations, as observed for example in studies associated with environmental impact assessment (Koornneef et al., 2008), international humanitarian development (Anh et al., 2007) or work related learning (Connor and MacFarlane, 2006). They characteristically involve the development, assimilation and synthesis of broad base of evidence derived from a diverse range of research and non-research sources. They are generally multidisciplinary in nature and commonly supplement existing evidence with the consultative, consensus-building methodologies to gain the benefit of expert opinion and other explicit value judgements such as those expressed by public consensus and preferences.

Scoping studies are a relatively recent addition to the nursing and health care literature and gaining in popularity. In the United Kingdom, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Service Delivery and Organisation Research and Development Programme (SDO) has spear headed the scoping movement through academically robust and practically relevant studies, although a clear definition of scoping is lacking (Anderson et al., 2008). Rather, scoping is variously conceptualised within the realms of research of research (Whittemore and Knafl, 2005) providing an approach through which an overview and critical analysis of existing evidence clarifies, defines and develops conceptual boundaries within a topic or across a field of evidence. An example of key concepts provided to guide an SDO commissioned scoping study is seen in Fig. 1. Despite this lead, studies presented as scoping in the nursing literature assume a wide range of interpretation and applications that appear to be at odds with these wider concepts of scoping. The distinction between scoping as a preliminary fact finding element of research or research related activity such as audit and evaluation, and a more formalised approach, has to date received little attention.

Collectively, definitions of primary research and evidence synthesis emphasize the importance of generating and disseminating new knowledge by addressing clearly defined questions through systematic, methodologically rigorous and auditable analytical processes that follow an ethical framework (Clark and Hockey, 1989, Bortolotti and Henrichs, 2007). Implicit within these definitions is the need to ensure, whether originating from quantitative or qualitative paradigms, transparency, validity and reliability. Quantitative empirical research or synthesis of primary research demonstrates external validity and reproducibility that enable the findings to be generalised with confidence to other settings. In qualitative research, although the criteria to address the issue of rigour is judged differently (Mays et al., 2005), transparency, credibility, validity and relevance of findings that is grounded in the evidence, is equally applicable (Guba and Lincoln, 2005, Mays and Pope, 2000, Dixon-Woods et al., 2004). Similar arguments are made in relation to other research related activities such as clinical audit, service evaluation and practice development (Gerrish and Mawson, 2005). Much has been written about the differences between primary research and these activities but it is generally agreed that the key difference relates directly to seeking information of local relevance for service or practice improvement. This is judged against specific criteria, rather than seeking new knowledge that has a wider application (Closs and Cheater, 1996).

In this paper, the authors will contend that regardless of the level of inquiry a scoping study has to stand up to the rigor required of all primary and secondary research with clear, consistent standards guiding and governing its design. We suggest that the strengths of a scoping study and what makes it successful lie in its ability to be both developmental and intellectually creative. Scoping gives meaning to the ‘what’ and ‘why’ explanations of an inquiry as opposed to the ‘who’ ‘where’ and ‘how’ and provides a comprehensive and panoramic overview that not only illuminates its extent and context but also has the potential to influence policy and practice developments.

Section snippets

Aims and objectives

The aim of this review is to evaluate the status of scoping studies undertaken within the field of nursing. Specific objectives are to

  • identify the extent, range and nature of scoping studies in the nursing literature;

  • explore the processes used to undertake scoping;

  • identify the quality, utility and position of scoping within the hierarchy of research evidence.

Design

An interpretative scoping literature review methodology based on the framework outlined by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) is used (Fig. 2).

Discussion

The intention of this paper was to stimulate debate about what is scoping and where it is positioned in terms of research. Over the past decade, studies reported as scoping have increasingly begun to appear within the nursing literature. It has been argued that within the portfolio of research related activities, scoping conceptually, is ‘little more than umbrella term, having a variety of functions’ (Anderson et al., 2008 p. 3). As the emphasis increases on the need to base clinical practice

Conclusion

In conclusion, we believe that scoping is essentially a developmental, research related activity that in relation to research in nursing is embryonic and continues to evolve. The main strengths of a scoping study lie in its ability to extract the essence of a diverse body of evidence and give meaning and significance to a topic that is both developmental and intellectually creative. As with other approaches to research and evidence synthesis a more standardized approach is required. We suggest

Author's contribution

All authors contributed to the design of this paper. KD was the principle investigator and wrote all the drafts. All authors contributed to the development of the final draft and approved the final manuscript.

Conflicts of interest: None declared.

Ethical approval: Not required.

Funding: Review undertaken as part of postdoctoral fellowship funded by Burdett Institute.

Reference (50)

  • H. Arksey et al.

    Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework.

    International Journal Of Social Research Methodology Theory & Practice

    (2005)
  • T. Bewley

    Preparation for non-medical prescribing: a review

    Paediatric Nursing

    (2007)
  • L. Bortolotti et al.

    Delimiting the concept of research: an ethical perspective

    Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics

    (2007)
  • J.M. Clark et al.
    (1989)
  • Clinton, M., 2000. Scoping study of the Australian mental health nursing workforce: Final Report of the Australian and...
  • Clinton, M., Hazelton, M., 2000. ANZCMHN Final Report: Scoping Study of the Australian Mental Health Nursing Workforce...
  • M. Clinton et al.

    Scoping mental health nursing education

    Australian New Zealand Journal of Mental Health Nursing

    (2000)
  • M. Clinton et al.

    Scoping the Australian mental health nursing workforce

    Australian New Zealand Journal of Mental Health Nursing

    (2000)
  • M. Clinton et al.

    Scoping the prospects of Australian mental health nursing

    Australian New Zealand Journal of Mental Health Nursing

    (2000)
  • M. Clinton et al.

    Towards a Foucauldian reading of the Australian Mental Health Nursing Workforce

    International Journal of Mental Health Nursing

    (2002)
  • S.J. Closs et al.

    Audit or research—what is the difference?

    Journal of Clinical Nursing

    (1996)
  • Connor, H., MacFarlane, K., 2006. Work Related Learning (WRL) in Higher Education—a Scoping Study. Centre for Research...
  • M. Correa et al.

    Reconnaissance assessment of risks for HIV transmission through health care and cosmetic services in India

    International Journal of STD & AIDS

    (2006)
  • M. Dixon-Woods et al.

    The problem of appraising qualitative research

    Quality & Safety in Health Care

    (2004)
  • Dixon-Woods, M., Cavers, D., Agarwal, A., Annandale.E, Arthur, A., Haley, J., Hus, R., Katbamna, S., Olsen, R., Smith,...
  • Cited by (582)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text