Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40759523›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Prioritising methodological research questions for scoping reviews, mapping reviews and evidence and gap maps for health research: a protocol for PROSPECT Delphi study.

Danielle Pollock, Sabira Hasanoff, Grace McBride, Raju Kanukula, Andrea C Tricco, Hanan Khalil, Fiona Campbell, Romy Menghao Jia, Lyndsay Alexander, Micah Peters and 15 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors.

Danielle PollockHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), The University of Adelaide School of Public Health, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Sabira HasanoffHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), The University of Adelaide School of Public Health, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia sabira.hasanoff@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7246-0485
Grace McBrideHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), The University of Adelaide School of Public Health, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Raju KanukulaHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), The University of Adelaide School of Public Health, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Andrea C TriccoKnowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4114-8971
Hanan KhalilDepartment of Rural and Indigenous Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3302-2009
Fiona CampbellPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4141-8863
Romy Menghao JiaThe University of Adelaide JBI, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Lyndsay AlexanderScottish Centre for Evidence-based, Multi-professional Practice: a JBI Centre of Excellence. School of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2437-9150
Micah PetersHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), The University of Adelaide School of Public Health, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Ariany Marques VieiraDepartment of Health, Kinesiology, and Applied Physiology, Concordia University, Montreal, Ontario, Canada.
Edoardo AromatarisThe University of Adelaide JBI, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Jack NunnScience for All, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Ashrita SaranEvaluation and Evidence Synthesis, Global Development Network, New Delhi, India.
Catrin EvansSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5338-2191
Christina GodfreyQueen's Collaboration for Health Care Quality: A JBI Centre of Excellence, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9292-3237
Dawid PieperInstitute for Health Services and Health System Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Rüdersdorf, Germany.
Érica Brandao de MoraesDepartment of Nursing Fundamentals and Administration, Federal Fluminense University School of Nursing, Niteroi, Brazil.
Linda BiestyUniversity of Galway School of Nursing and Midwifery, Galway, Ireland.
Heather ColquhounDepartment of Occupational Science & Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6226-2511
Declan DevaneUniversity of Galway School of Nursing and Midwifery, Galway, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9393-7075
Elaine ToomeyCentre for Health Research Methodology, University of Galway School of Nursing and Midwifery, Galway, Ireland.
Barbara ClyneDepartment of Public Health and Epidemiology, School of Population Health, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland.
Ellen DaviesAdelaide Health Simulation, The University of Adelaide Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Zachary MunnHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), The University of Adelaide School of Public Health, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7091-5842

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionScoping reviews, mapping reviews and evidence and gap maps (collectively known as 'big picture reviews') in health continue to gain popularity within the evidence ecosystem. These big-picture reviews are beneficial for policy-makers, guideline developers and researchers within the field of health for understanding the available evidence, characteristics, concepts and research gaps, which are often needed to support the development of policies, guidelines and practice. However, these reviews often face criticism related to poor and inconsistent methodological conduct and reporting. There is a need to understand which areas of these reviews require further methodological clarification and exploration. The aim of this project is to develop a research agenda for scoping reviews, mapping reviews and evidence and gap maps in health by identifying and prioritising specific research questions related to methodological uncertainties. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A modified e-Delphi process will be adopted. Participants (anticipated N=100) will include patients, clinicians, the public, researchers and others invested in creating a strategic research agenda for these reviews. This Delphi will be completed in four consecutive stages, including a survey collecting the methodological uncertainties for each of the big picture reviews, the development of research questions based on that survey and two further surveys and four workshops to prioritise the research questions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the University of Adelaide Human Research Ethics Committee (H-2024-188). The results will be communicated through open-access peer-reviewed publications and conferences. Videos and infographics will be developed and placed on the JBI (previously Joanna Briggs Institute) Scoping Review Network webpage.

Indexed as

Delphi TechniqueResearch DesignReview Literature as TopicHumansDelphi TechniqueHealth EducationHealth SurveysResearch DesignReview

Identifiers

PMID40759523
PMCPMC12323513

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.