ReviewJournal of advanced nursing2022
Arksey and O'Malley's consultation exercise in scoping reviews: A critical review.
Review in Journal of advanced nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cultural barriers influencing virtual community of practice: a scopic review.BMC psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Reprioritising consultation in scoping reviews: Clarifying purposes and practices.Medical education · 2026Article
- Article
- Staff behaviours that promote positive co-worker relationships in health and social care settings: A scoping review with implications for long-term residential care.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026Review
- Educational assessments in entry-level physical therapy education: a scoping review.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- The application of focused assessment with sonography for trauma in resource-limited settings: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Patient- and Public-Led Research - How Is It Defined and Practiced: A Scoping Review.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Exploring the role of group support models for HIV prevention among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA): a scoping review.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Review
- Methods of Engaging Interest-Holders in Healthcare Evidence Syntheses: A Scoping Review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Online Cognitive-Behavioral Programs for Women Living With Endometriosis: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Structured Clinical Tools for Periodic Health Assessment of Older Adults in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.Health science reports · 2025Review
- What Is Known About the Fish Intake of People Living in Disadvantaged Communities in the UK? A Scoping Review.Nutrition bulletin · 2025Article
- Consequences of the Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on child and adolescent mental, psychosocial, and physical health: A scoping review and interactive evidence map.Journal of child health care : for professionals working with children in the hospital and community · 2025Article
- Consumer and community involvement in paediatric intensive care research across Australia and New Zealand: a protocol for a mixed-methods environmental scan.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Salivary MicroRNAs as Potential Noninvasive Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- The Factors That Affect Sexual Safety on Adult Mental Health Inpatient Units: A Scoping Review and Content Analysis.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
- What is the current state of precision rehabilitation? Protocol for a scoping study with a consultation phase.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo explore how consultation exercises were described in a convenience sample of recent scoping reviews.
designCritical literature review. DATA SOURCES: We searched PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL and PubMed in July 2020. Our inclusion criterion was a peer-reviewed journal article reporting a scoping review in Danish, English, Norwegian or Swedish. REVIEW
methodsWe identified a convenience sample of articles (n = 66) reporting a consultation exercise as part of a scoping review. The descriptions of the consultation were charted, summarized and critically discussed.
resultsThe current analysis showed no widely accepted consensus on how to approach and report a consultation exercise in the sample of scoping reviews. The reports of stakeholder consultation processes were often brief and general, and often there were no reports of the effects of the stakeholder consultation processes. Further, there was no discussion of the principal theoretical problems mixing stakeholder voices and review findings.
conclusionThe finding that conventional research ethics and research methods often were suspended could indicate that the stakeholder consultants were in a precarious position because of power imbalances between researchers and stakeholder consultants. We suggest that a consultation exercise should only be included when it genuinely invites participation and reports on the effect of alternative voices. IMPACT: Scoping reviews are common across a range of disciplines, but they often lack definitional and methodological clarity. In their influential approach to scoping studies, Arksey and O'Malley introduced an optional 'consultation exercise', which has been heralded as a valuable tool that can be used to strengthen the process and outcome of a scoping study and to support the dissemination of the study's findings and its implications. However, there is no clear outline on about how to operationalize consultations of stakeholders in scoping studies/reviews. This article includes recommendations for consultation exercises, including encouraging an aspirational move from 'consultation' to 'participation'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.