ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2026
Extraction, analysis and presentation of results in a scoping review in Brazilian nursing: scoping review.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto map the literature on extraction, analysis, and presentation of results in scoping reviews in Brazilian nursing.
methodscoping review according to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines, including publications, in the following sources: PubMed, Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Google Scholar. The search was structured in three stages and conducted by two independent reviewers.
resultsone hundred and forty-three studies were included; the annual number increased from one (2013) to 41 (2023). In the title, 90.2% stated "scoping review"; 74.1% followed the JBI framework, but only 60.8% cited PRISMA-ScR, and 39.2% registered a protocol. Extraction remained largely manual: 82.5% used adapted JBI forms, and only 11.9% used support software. Descriptive summaries and thematic categorization predominated. Presentation favored charts and tables (96%).
conclusionNursing scoping reviews in Brazil use standardized procedures, but lack greater adherence to PRISMA-ScR, prior registration, and digital technologies. Training in international guidelines, AI, and interactive visualizations are priorities to increase transparency, reproducibility, and clinical impact.
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.