Skip to Main Content

Scoping & Systematic Reviews

In this guide you will find information about how to conduct a scoping and systematic review plus information on how librarians can support your in the process.

About Step 8: Write The Review

Average time (hours) to complete
                                                                        120 

In Step 8, you will write an article or a paper about your systematic/scoping review.  It will likely have five sections: introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion.  You will: 

  1. Re-run your searches if many months have passed since the most recent search
  2. Review the reporting standards you will use, such as PRISMA. 
  3. Gather your completed data tables and PRISMA chart. 
  4. Write the Introduction to the topic and your study, Methods of your research, Results of your research, and Discussion of your results.
  5. Write an Abstract describing your study and a Conclusion summarizing your paper. 
  6. Identifying Themes
  7. Cite the studies included in your review and any other articles you may have used in your paper. 
  8. Consult with an external librarian (not on the author team) to complete the Prisma for Searching (Prisma S) checklist.
  9. If you wish to publish your work, choose a target journal for your article.

The PRISMA Checklist will help you report the details of your scoping or systematic review. Your paper will also include a PRISMA chart that is an image of your research process. 

Click tabs to see how it applies to Step 8: Write the Review

To write your review, you will need the data from your PRISMA flow diagram.  Review the PRISMA checklist to see which items you should report in your methods section.

Please see Systematic & Scoping Review Service for more
detailed information and to submit a request form. 

A librarian can advise you on the process of organizing and writing up your systematic review, including: 

  • Applying the PRISMA reporting templates and the level of detail to include for each element
  • Re-run your searches if many months have passed since the most recent search
  • How to report a scoping and systematic review search strategy and your review methodology in the completed review
  • How to use prior published reviews to guide you in organizing your manuscript
  • Consult an external librarian (not on the author team) to complete the Prisma for Searching (Prisma S) checklist.

Review Manuscript Sections

Scientific articles often follow the IMRaD format: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion.  You will also need a title and an abstract to summarize your research.

Writing a clear and detailed review report and sharing it in the appropriate medium ensures that your research has the greatest impact, reaching those who can best put it to use.

Your report will include a summary and analysis of your findings, and a detailed explanation of your methods and process. Readers should be able to follow and potentially replicate every step. Refer back to the framework and guidelines you chose as you prepare your manuscript. Keep in mind the conventions of any commissioning body or target journal, as they may have specific requirements for systematic & scoping reviews.

Presenting your Results

Will the information from included studies be presented as a map/diagram, table, narrative format?

  • Present summaries of findings and explain how they answered the original review question(s).
  • What were the main findings? How do the findings fit with previous research? Where are the gaps in the literature? What are strengths/limitations of the included studies? What are strengths/limitations of the review process? 
  • Discuss ideas for future research based on the findings from this review.

The results of a review may be presented in your final paper in a variety of ways, including:

  • tables and charts, featuring distribution of studies by year or period of publication, countries of origin, area of intervention (clinical, policy, educational, etc.) and research methods; and/or
  • in a descriptive format that aligns with the review objective/s and scope.

Scoping reviews follow the same structure as original research articles, but you will need to report on your search instead of on details like the participants or sampling.

The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis: the scoping review and summary of the evidence (Chapter 11.3)

Below are some of the requirements for your final paper from the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. This aligns with PRISMA-ScR, however you should also check specific journal author guidelines if you plan to publish your review. 

  • Title - structured using PCC and including '...: a scoping review'
  • Abstract - a summary of the main features focusing on results
  • Introduction - including objective aligned with PCC
  • Review question/s
  • Inclusion criteria - including types of participants, concept, context, and types of sources of evidence
  • Methods - processes for searching, screening, data extraction, and analysis and presentation of results
  • Results - flow diagram, source of evidence characteristics, findings
  • Discussion - results and limitations of the review
  • Conclusions and recommendations
  • Conflicts of interest, sources of funding and acknowledgements
  • References
  • Appendices - all search strategies, sources excluded after full-text review, data extraction instrument used

Learn more:

The following is from Prisma - as you can see they are very similar.
Sections of your manuscript are shown as bold headings in the PRISMA checklist.
Title Describe your manuscript and state whether it is a scoping review, meta-analysis, or both.
Abstract Structure the abstract and include (as applicable): background, objectives, data sources, study eligibility criteria, participants, interventions, quality assessment and synthesis methods, results, limitations, conclusions, implications of key findings, and scoping review registration number.
Introduction Describe the rationale for the review and provide a statement of questions being addressed.
Methods Include details regarding the protocol, eligibility criteria, databases searched, full search strategy of at least one database (often reported in appendix), and the study selection process. Describe how data were extracted and analyzed. If a librarian is part of your research team, that person may be best suited to write this section. 
Results Report the numbers of articles screened at each stage using a PRISMA diagram. Include information about included study characteristics, risk of bias (quality assessment) within studies, and results across studies.
Discussion Summarize main findings, including the strength of evidence and limitations of the review. Provide a general interpretation of the results and implications for future research.
Funding Describe any sources of funding for the scoping review.
Appendix Include entire search strategy for at least one database in the appendix (include search strategies for all databases searched for more transparency). 

Refer to the PRISMA checklist for more information.

Systematic reviews follow the same structure as original research articles, but you will need to report on your search instead of on details like the participants or sampling. Sections of your manuscript are shown as bold headings in the PRISMA checklist.

Title Describe your manuscript and state whether it is a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both.
Abstract Structure the abstract and include (as applicable): background, objectives, data sources, study eligibility criteria, participants, interventions, quality assessment and synthesis methods, results, limitations, conclusions, implications of key findings, and systematic review registration number.
Introduction Describe the rationale for the review and provide a statement of questions being addressed.
Methods Include details regarding the protocol, eligibility criteria, databases searched, full search strategy of at least one database (often reported in appendix), and the study selection process. Describe how data were extracted and analyzed. If a librarian is part of your research team, that person may be best suited to write this section. 
Results Report the numbers of articles screened at each stage using a PRISMA diagram. Include information about included study characteristics, risk of bias (quality assessment) within studies, and results across studies.
Discussion Summarize main findings, including the strength of evidence and limitations of the review. Provide a general interpretation of the results and implications for future research.
Funding Describe any sources of funding for the systematic review.
Appendix Include entire search strategy for at least one database in the appendix (include search strategies for all databases searched for more transparency). 

Refer to the PRISMA checklist for more information.

Reporting standards & guidelines

Be sure to reference reporting standards when writing your review. This helps ensure that you communicate essential components of your methods, results, and conclusions. There are a number of tools that can be used to ensure compliance with reporting guidelines. A few review-writing resources are listed below.

Scoping Review Systematic Review

 

Synthesizing your Results

Once you have completed your analysis, you will want to both summarize and synthesize those results. You may have a qualitative synthesis, a quantitative synthesis, or both.

Qualitative Synthesis

This is a narrative approach for putting the pieces together into a coherent whole. In a qualitative synthesis, you will summarize, compare, and contrast the characteristics and findings, exploring the relationships between then. Further, you will discuss the relevance and applicability of the evidence to your research question. You will also analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the body of evidence. Focus on where the gaps are in the evidence and provide recommendations for further research.

Quantitative Synthesis

While scoping reviews do not often have the robust level of meta-analysis that other reviews may include, there is often an element of data charting or mapping. The quantitative synthesis combines and analyzes the evidence using statistical techniques. This includes comparing methodological similarities and differences and potentially the quality of the studies conducted.

Identifying Themes

  • This article on Identifying themes: 

https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45. It looks like it is used frequently in systematic and scoping reviews as a framework to identify themes.

  • This article includes a step-by-step process 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349506918_Doing_a_Thematic_Analysis_A_Practical_Step-by-Step_Guide

You also might find the following video helpful

Report your review with PRISMA

The PRISMA checklist

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Reviews is a 22-item checklist used to improve transparency in scoping reviews. These items cover all aspects of the manuscript, including title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and funding. The PRISMA checklist can be downloaded in PDF or Word files.

The PRISMA flow diagram

The PRISMA Flow Diagram visually depicts the flow of studies through each phase of the review process. The PRISMA Flow Diagram can be downloaded in Word files.

Documenting grey literature and/or hand searches

If you have also searched additional sources, such as professional organization websites, cited or citing references, etc., document your grey literature search using the flow diagram template version 1 PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for new systematic reviews which included searches of databases, registers and other sources or the version 2 PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for updated systematic reviews which included searches of databases, registers and other sources. 

Complete the boxes documenting your database searches,  Identification of studies via databases and registers, according to the PRISMA flow diagram instructions.  Complete the boxes documenting your grey literature and/or hand searches on the right side of the template, identification of studies via other methods, using the steps below.

Need help completing the PRISMA flow diagram?

There are different PRISMA flow diagram templates for new and updated reviews, as well as different templates for reviews with and without grey literature searches. Be sure you download the correct template to match your review methods, then follow the steps below for each portion of the diagram you have available. For step by step instruction see Creating a Prisma Flow Diagram Step by Step.

The PRISMA checklist

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) is a 27-item checklist used to improve transparency in systematic reviews. These items cover all aspects of the manuscript, including title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and funding. The PRISMA checklist can be downloaded in PDF or Word files.

The PRISMA flow diagram

The PRISMA Flow Diagram visually depicts the flow of studies through each phase of the review process. The PRISMA Flow Diagram can be downloaded in Word files.

Documenting grey literature and/or hand searches

If you have also searched additional sources, such as professional organization websites, cited or citing references, etc., document your grey literature search using the flow diagram template version 1 PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for new systematic reviews which included searches of databases, registers and other sources or the version 2 PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for updated systematic reviews which included searches of databases, registers and other sources. 

Complete the boxes documenting your database searches,  Identification of studies via databases and registers, according to the PRISMA flow diagram instructions.  Complete the boxes documenting your grey literature and/or hand searches on the right side of the template, Identification of studies via other methods, using the steps below.

Need help completing the PRISMA flow diagram?

There are different PRISMA flow diagram templates for new and updated reviews, as well as different templates for reviews with and without grey literature searches. Be sure you download the correct template to match your review methods, then follow the steps below for each portion of the diagram you have available. For step by step instruction see Creating a Prisma Flow Diagram Step by Step.

Prisma for Searching (Prisma-S)

The PRISMA extension for searching was published in 2021. The checklist includes 16 reporting items, each of which is detailed with exemplar reporting and Rationale. After the completion of the review, an external librarian who is not on the author team should read the review and complete the PRISMA-S Checklist. It is available in PDF, Word, and Excel from the PRISMA website.

The PRISMA-S Extension documents all the required elements needed in your final, published article to ensure that your search is transparent and reproducible. It is recommended that you familiarize yourself with the checklist before finalizing your search strategy to ensure you document all the necessary information.

Publication - End Goals to think about

The publication component is where librarians can become useful again. A librarian can help you identify high-impact journals and help you consider the differences between open access and traditional publishing. In addition, the library has partnerships with publishers to allow authors from APU to publish open access with free or limited APC fees. 

Do your research on the journal(s) you intend to submit to. Make sure you understand their audience, their scope and tone, and any standards or expectations they may have around systematic & scoping reviews.

Additional Publications

Think through how to maximize your publications with your work

  1. Published Systematic or Scoping Review
  2. Register the Protocol
  3. Published data & protocol
  4. Policy brief or white papers for an organization or popular or news rather than scholarly publication