The role of scoping reviews in guideline development

Oral
2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
Alexander L1, Barker T2, Ding S3, Evans C4, Falavigna M5, Florez I6, Godfrey C7, Jia R8, Khalil H9, Klugar M10, Munn Z2, Pieper D11, Pollock D2, Qaseem A12, Stein A13, Tricco A14
1Scottish Centre for Evidence-based, Multi-professional Practice: a JBI Centre of Excellence; School of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen , United Kingdom
2Health Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
3Department of Radiologic Medical Imaging Technology, HESAV School of Health Sciences (HESAV), University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland (HES-SO), Lausanne, Switzerland; Bureau d’Echange des Savoirs pour des praTiques exemplaires de soins (BEST) : A JBI Centre of Excellence, , Switzerland
4The Nottingham Centre for Evidence Based Healthcare, School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
5 National Institute for Health Technology Assessment, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
6Department of Pediatrics, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia; School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
7 Queen’s Collaboration for Health Care Quality: A JBI Centre of Excellence, Queen’s University School of Nursing, Kingston, Canada
8JBI, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Science, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
9School of Psychology and Public Health, Department of Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
10Cochrane Czech Republic, Czech Republic: a JBI Centre of Excellence, Czech GRADE Network, Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic , Prauge, Czech Republic; Center of Evidence-based Education and Arts Therapies: A JBI Affiliated Group, Palacky University Olomouc Faculty of Education, Olomouc, Czech Republic
11 Institute for Health Services and Health System Research, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School, Germany; Center for Health Services Research Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School, Brandenburg, Germany
12American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, United States
13Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil
14Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Epidemiology Division and Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
Background: Systematic reviews are an integral part of guideline development, especially when forming a recommendation that is applicable to a certain context. However, newer synthesis methodologies, such as scoping reviews, are emerging within the evidence ecosystem, which may also play a role in guideline development. This presentation will discuss scoping reviews' potential role and utility within guideline development.

Objectives: This article aims to summarize and provide examples of the role of scoping reviews in guideline development.

Methods: Drawing on the expertise of the JBI scoping review group and Guidelines International Network members, this presentation will summarize 5 key roles of scoping reviews in guideline development.

Results: Although scoping reviews cannot replace systematic reviews in guideline development, we propose they can play an important supplementary role. Guideline developers can consider using scoping reviews when they need to (1) identify what existing guidelines could be adopted, adapted, or adoloped; (2) understand the breadth of evidence that exists on a particular issue and help with the development and prioritization of questions, or identify previous systematic reviews; (3) identify contextual factors and information relevant for a guideline recommendation; (4) identify potential strategies for implementation and monitoring; and (5) conduct evidence surveillance and living mapping approaches.

Conclusions: Scoping reviews conducted and reported according to best-practice guidance and standards can be used in conjunction with systematic reviews to support the work of guideline developers.