ArticleSystematic reviews2023
Data visualisation in scoping reviews and evidence maps on health topics: a cross-sectional analysis.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of swimming on cognitive and health outcomes in older adults and insights into participation facilitators and barriers: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Prevalence and solving strategies of drug-related problems in adult psychiatric inpatients - a systematic review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Pooled it
- Visualization of Multi-indication Randomized Control Trial Evidence to Support Decision Making in Oncology: A Case Study on Bevacizumab.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Article
- The role of the family in youth psychiatric readmission: a scoping review.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Review
- Antibiotic dispensing practices and determinants among informal healthcare providers in low- and middle-income countries: a mixed-methods scoping review.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Article
- A scoping review approach for synthesizing and mapping research in anesthesia and pain medicine.Anesthesia and pain medicine · 2026Review
- Using artificial intelligence for the development of a living evidence map: The pharmacopuncture example.Integrative medicine research · 2025Article
- Article
- Surgical transitional care interventions and their outcomes: a scoping review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Review
- Review
- "Weibing" in traditional Chinese medicine-biological basis and mathematical representation of disease-susceptible state.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2025Review
- Methenamine hippurate for the management and prophylaxis of recurrent urinary tract infections: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- In-hospital motor interventions to reduce neurodevelopmental impairment in preterm infants: a scoping review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Key concepts and reporting recommendations for mapping reviews: A scoping review of 68 guidance and methodological studies.Research synthesis methods · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScoping reviews and evidence maps are forms of evidence synthesis that aim to map the available literature on a topic and are well-suited to visual presentation of results. A range of data visualisation methods and interactive data visualisation tools exist that may make scoping reviews more useful to knowledge users. The aim of this study was to explore the use of data visualisation in a sample of recent scoping reviews and evidence maps on health topics, with a particular focus on interactive data visualisation.
methodsOvid MEDLINE ALL was searched for recent scoping reviews and evidence maps (June 2020-May 2021), and a sample of 300 papers that met basic selection criteria was taken. Data were extracted on the aim of each review and the use of data visualisation, including types of data visualisation used, variables presented and the use of interactivity. Descriptive data analysis was undertaken of the 238 reviews that aimed to map evidence.
resultsOf the 238 scoping reviews or evidence maps in our analysis, around one-third (37.8%) included some form of data visualisation. Thirty-five different types of data visualisation were used across this sample, although most data visualisations identified were simple bar charts (standard, stacked or multi-set), pie charts or cross-tabulations (60.8%). Most data visualisations presented a single variable (64.4%) or two variables (26.1%). Almost a third of the reviews that used data visualisation did not use any colour (28.9%). Only two reviews presented interactive data visualisation, and few reported the software used to create visualisations.
conclusionsData visualisation is currently underused by scoping review authors. In particular, there is potential for much greater use of more innovative forms of data visualisation and interactive data visualisation. Where more innovative data visualisation is used, scoping reviews have made use of a wide range of different methods. Increased use of these more engaging visualisations may make scoping reviews more useful for a range of stakeholders.
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.