Conducting a Scoping Review in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Henry L Lew1, Melissa K Kahili-Heede, Pauline Mashima
1From the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii at Mānoa, Honolulu, Hawaii (HLL, PM); Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia (HLL); Health Sciences Library, John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii at Mānoa, Honolulu, Hawaii (MKK-H); Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (W-HH); Center of Evidence-based Medicine, Department of Education, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (W-HH); Master Program in Long-Term Care and School of Gerontology Health Management, College of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan (W-HH); and Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan (W-HH).
Abstract:
In the field of physical medicine and rehabilitation, there is a continuous need to conduct literature search in advancing evidence-based practice. In addition to the traditional meta-analysis approach, many clinicians have turned their attention to systematic reviews and scoping reviews for research evidence to support clinical practice. In this article, the authors aimed to (1) compare the similarities, differences, pros, and cons between a scoping review, a systematic review, and a meta-analysis and (2) summarize the fundamental stages in conducting a scoping review. Examples of recently published articles relevant to physical medicine and rehabilitation are presented to illustrate the concept and value of scoping reviews.
