Scoping review services

A scoping review earns its place when the question is too broad or too new for a focused effect estimate. If you want to know how much research exists on a topic, what designs and populations have been studied, or whether a full systematic review is even feasible yet, a scoping review answers that before you invest in pooling. It is judged not on a single result but on the breadth and rigour of the mapping: whether the search was wide enough, whether the charting was consistent, and whether the gaps it identifies are real and useful. We run it to that standard, following the structure in our guide on how to conduct a scoping review.

The deliberate breadth is the point, and it changes how the question is framed. Rather than the tight comparison of a PICO question, a scoping review uses PCC to keep the net wide while still defining clear boundaries. If the mapping shows the evidence is mature enough to synthesise, the natural next step is a full systematic review or a focused meta-analysis.

1. 1

   Question and protocol

   We frame the question with the PCC framework, set the eligibility criteria, and prepare a protocol lodged on the Open Science Framework before charting begins.

2. 2

   Broad reproducible search

   We design a wide, documented search across the relevant databases and grey literature, tuned for the coverage a scoping review needs.

3. 3

   Screening and charting

   We screen against the criteria and chart each included source into a structured data table, the step that turns a pile of studies into a map.

4. 4

   Evidence map and PRISMA-ScR reporting

   We summarise the charted data into an evidence map, identify the gaps, and report the whole process against the PRISMA-ScR checklist.

You receive a registered protocol, a documented search strategy, a charting table, an evidence map of the field, and a manuscript-ready write-up reported against the PRISMA reporting guideline family, in this case the PRISMA-ScR extension. The mapping makes the research gaps explicit, so you finish with a clear view of which questions justify a deeper review. Where charting needs the same dual-reviewer discipline as a full review, our data extraction and coding service supports the process, and the PRISMA flow diagram documents the selection.

• A protocol registered on the Open Science Framework before charting
• A wide, documented search across databases and grey literature
• A structured charting table covering every included source
• An evidence map showing how the literature is distributed
• An explicit statement of the gaps worth a deeper review
• A manuscript-ready write-up reported against PRISMA-ScR

We quote a fixed fee shaped by the breadth of the field, the number of databases the map needs to cover, the expected volume of sources to chart, and how much of the write-up you want drafted. Tell us the field you want mapped and we will return a fixed quote for the full scoping review.