The “big picture review” family: similarities and differences between scoping reviews, mapping reviews, and evidence gap maps_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

HAN Shuyu ¹ , CAI Jiaqi ¹ , JIAO Xueping ² ,  WANG Zhiwen ^1,3

1. School of Nursing Peking University, Beijing 100191, P. R. China;
2. Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030013, P. R. China;
3. Peking University Health Science Centre for Evidence-Based Nursing, Beijing 100191, P. R. China;

Corresponding author：

WANG Zhiwen, Email: wzwjing@sina.com

Keywords：

Scoping review; Mapping review; Evidence gap maps

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.202406117

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Compared with classic systematic review types, the scoping review, mapping review and evidence gap maps (EGMs) address broader research questions. Therefore, they are classified into the "big picture review" family. These three types of evidence synthesis have developed rapidly in recent years, but the related concepts are easy to be confused. This article introduces the methodological development process of the three types of evidence synthesis, summarizes the similarities and differences in terms of research purposes and methodology based on the methodological guidelines of the three types of evidence synthesis in the "big picture review" family. The author hopes that this article can help domestic researchers distinguish and identify the three types of evidence synthesis, avoid conceptual confusion, and correctly choose the type of evidence synthesis in the "big picture review" family according to the research purpose.

1.	Sutton A, Clowes M, Preston L, et al. Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Info Libr J, 2019, 36(3): 202-222.
2.	Campbell F, Tricco AC, Munn Z, et al. Mapping reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence and gap maps (EGMs): the same but different- the "big picture" review family. Syst Rev, 2023, 12(1): 45.
3.	Colquhoun HL, Levac D, O'Brien KK, et al. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol, 2014, 67(12): 1291-1294.
4.	Tricco AC, Antony J, Soobiah C, et al. Knowledge synthesis methods for integrating qualitative and quantitative data: a scoping review reveals poor operationalization of the methodological steps. J Clin Epidemiol, 2016, 73: 29-35.
5.	Lukersmith S, Millington M, Salvador-Carulla L. What is case management. A scoping and mapping review. Int J Integr Care, 2016, 16(4): 2.
6.	Fernández-Sotos P, Torio I, Fernández-Caballero A, et al. Social cognition remediation interventions: a systematic mapping review. PLoS One, 2019, 14(6): e0218720.
7.	Sun Y, Zhou J, Ji M, et al. Development and evaluation of health recommender systems: systematic scoping review and evidence mapping. J Med Internet Res, 2023, 25: e38184.
8.	Munn Z, Pollock D, Khalil H, et al. What are scoping reviews. Providing a formal definition of scoping reviews as a type of evidence synthesis. JBI Evid Synth, 2022, 20(4): 950-952.
9.	Moffett J, Hammond J, Murphy P, et al. The ubiquity of uncertainty: a scoping review on how undergraduate health professions' students engage with uncertainty. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract, 2021, 26(3): 913-958.
10.	Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci, 2010, 5: 69.
11.	Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, et al. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc, 2015, 13(3): 141-146.
12.	Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Tricco AC, et al. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth, 2020, 18(10): 2119-2126.
13.	Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Porritt K, et al. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. 2024.
14.	Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med, 2018, 169(7): 467-473.
15.	Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ, 2009, 339: b2700.
16.	Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 2021, 372: n71.
17.	James KL, Randall NP, Haddaway NR. A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences. Environ Evid, 2016, 5(1): 7.
18.	Oakley A, Gough D, Oliver S, et al. The politics of evidence and methodology: lessons from the EPPI-Centre. Evidence & Policy, 2005, 1(1): 5-31.
19.	Clapton J, Rutter D, Sharif N. SCIE Systematic mapping guidance. 2009.
20.	Snilstveit B, Vojtkova M, Bhavsar A, et al. Evidence & gap maps: a tool for promoting evidence informed policy and strategic research agendas. J Clin Epidemiol, 2016, 79: 120-129.
21.	冷敏敏, 赵雅洁, 李立玉, 等. 网络干预在痴呆老年人居家照护中应用的范围综述. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(5): 694-699.
22.	Leng M, Zhao Y, Xiao H, et al. Internet-based supportive interventions for family caregivers of people with dementia: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res, 2020, 22(9): e19468.
23.	Lekieffre M, Gallay L, Landon-Cardinal O, et al. Joint and muscle inflammatory disease: a scoping review of the published evidence. Semin Arthritis Rheum, 2023, 61: 152227.
24.	Hammar T, Hamqvist S, Zetterholm M, et al. Current knowledge about providing drug-drug interaction services for patients-a scoping review. Pharmacy (Basel), 2021, 9(2): 69.
25.	Goudarzian AH, Nikbakht Nasrabadi A, Sharif-Nia H, et al. Exploring the concept and management strategies of caring stress among clinical nurses: a scoping review. Front Psychiatry, 2024, 15: 1337938.
26.	Kuang Y, Yuan X, Zhu Z, et al. Financial toxicity among breast cancer patients: a scoping review of risk factors and outcomes. Cancer Nurs, 2023.
27.	Geltmeyer K, Eeckloo K, Dehennin L, et al. How much do we know about nursing care delivery models in a hospital setting. A mapping review. Nurs Inq, 2024, 31(3): e12636.
28.	Dominski FH, Lorenzetti Branco JH, Buonanno G, et al. Effects of air pollution on health: a mapping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Environ Res, 2021, 201: 111487.
29.	Snilstveit B, Vojtkova M, Bhavsar A, et al. Evidence & gap maps: a tool for promoting evidence informed policy and strategic research agendas. J Clin Epidemiol, 2016, 79: 120-129.
30.	International Initiative for Impact Evaluation. Gap map of systematic reviews: HIV/AIDS programmes in low and middle income countries. 2011.

1. Sutton A, Clowes M, Preston L, et al. Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Info Libr J, 2019, 36(3): 202-222.
2. Campbell F, Tricco AC, Munn Z, et al. Mapping reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence and gap maps (EGMs): the same but different- the "big picture" review family. Syst Rev, 2023, 12(1): 45.
3. Colquhoun HL, Levac D, O'Brien KK, et al. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol, 2014, 67(12): 1291-1294.
4. Tricco AC, Antony J, Soobiah C, et al. Knowledge synthesis methods for integrating qualitative and quantitative data: a scoping review reveals poor operationalization of the methodological steps. J Clin Epidemiol, 2016, 73: 29-35.
5. Lukersmith S, Millington M, Salvador-Carulla L. What is case management. A scoping and mapping review. Int J Integr Care, 2016, 16(4): 2.
6. Fernández-Sotos P, Torio I, Fernández-Caballero A, et al. Social cognition remediation interventions: a systematic mapping review. PLoS One, 2019, 14(6): e0218720.
7. Sun Y, Zhou J, Ji M, et al. Development and evaluation of health recommender systems: systematic scoping review and evidence mapping. J Med Internet Res, 2023, 25: e38184.
8. Munn Z, Pollock D, Khalil H, et al. What are scoping reviews. Providing a formal definition of scoping reviews as a type of evidence synthesis. JBI Evid Synth, 2022, 20(4): 950-952.
9. Moffett J, Hammond J, Murphy P, et al. The ubiquity of uncertainty: a scoping review on how undergraduate health professions' students engage with uncertainty. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract, 2021, 26(3): 913-958.
10. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci, 2010, 5: 69.
11. Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, et al. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc, 2015, 13(3): 141-146.
12. Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Tricco AC, et al. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth, 2020, 18(10): 2119-2126.
13. Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Porritt K, et al. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. 2024.
14. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med, 2018, 169(7): 467-473.
15. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ, 2009, 339: b2700.
16. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 2021, 372: n71.
17. James KL, Randall NP, Haddaway NR. A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences. Environ Evid, 2016, 5(1): 7.
18. Oakley A, Gough D, Oliver S, et al. The politics of evidence and methodology: lessons from the EPPI-Centre. Evidence & Policy, 2005, 1(1): 5-31.
19. Clapton J, Rutter D, Sharif N. SCIE Systematic mapping guidance. 2009.
20. Snilstveit B, Vojtkova M, Bhavsar A, et al. Evidence & gap maps: a tool for promoting evidence informed policy and strategic research agendas. J Clin Epidemiol, 2016, 79: 120-129.
21. 冷敏敏, 赵雅洁, 李立玉, 等. 网络干预在痴呆老年人居家照护中应用的范围综述. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(5): 694-699.
22. Leng M, Zhao Y, Xiao H, et al. Internet-based supportive interventions for family caregivers of people with dementia: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res, 2020, 22(9): e19468.
23. Lekieffre M, Gallay L, Landon-Cardinal O, et al. Joint and muscle inflammatory disease: a scoping review of the published evidence. Semin Arthritis Rheum, 2023, 61: 152227.
24. Hammar T, Hamqvist S, Zetterholm M, et al. Current knowledge about providing drug-drug interaction services for patients-a scoping review. Pharmacy (Basel), 2021, 9(2): 69.
25. Goudarzian AH, Nikbakht Nasrabadi A, Sharif-Nia H, et al. Exploring the concept and management strategies of caring stress among clinical nurses: a scoping review. Front Psychiatry, 2024, 15: 1337938.
26. Kuang Y, Yuan X, Zhu Z, et al. Financial toxicity among breast cancer patients: a scoping review of risk factors and outcomes. Cancer Nurs, 2023.
27. Geltmeyer K, Eeckloo K, Dehennin L, et al. How much do we know about nursing care delivery models in a hospital setting. A mapping review. Nurs Inq, 2024, 31(3): e12636.
28. Dominski FH, Lorenzetti Branco JH, Buonanno G, et al. Effects of air pollution on health: a mapping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Environ Res, 2021, 201: 111487.
29. Snilstveit B, Vojtkova M, Bhavsar A, et al. Evidence & gap maps: a tool for promoting evidence informed policy and strategic research agendas. J Clin Epidemiol, 2016, 79: 120-129.
30. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation. Gap map of systematic reviews: HIV/AIDS programmes in low and middle income countries. 2011.

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Latest ArticlesThe “big picture review” family: similarities and differences between scoping reviews, mapping reviews, and evidence gap maps

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Format

Content