PRISMA-ScR
PRISMA-ScR is a checklist designed to improve the reporting of scoping reviews. It helps ensure that key information is clearly presented so readers can better understand the scope, methods, and findings of a review.
At a glance
Use when
Reporting results of a scoping review to ensure clarity, transparency, and completeness for diverse audiences including researchers, policymakers, and patients
Avoid when
Conducting the methodological steps of a scoping review or when a different type of evidence synthesis (e.g., systematic review) is being reported
Inputs
A completed scoping review or draft report requiring structured reporting
Outputs
A fully reported scoping review that adheres to standardized transparency and completeness criteria
How it works
The PRISMA-ScR checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and two research leads following EQUATOR Network guidelines. It includes 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items, each with a rationale and example of good reporting practice. It aims to standardize and enhance transparency in scoping review reporting.
- HTA domains
- Clinical Effectiveness, Patient and Social Aspects, Aspects Beyond HTA
- Categories
- Evidence SynthesisReporting Standards
- Assumptions
- The scoping review has been conducted systematically and aims to map existing evidence, identify concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps
- Strengths
- Developed by an international expert panel using established methodology; improves consistency, transparency, and completeness of reporting; widely endorsed in health research
- Limitations
- Does not provide guidance on conducting the scoping review itself, only on how to report it; does not replace other methodological frameworks like Arksey & O'Malley or JBI
- Also known as
- PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews
Questions this answers
- › What should be included in the title and abstract of a scoping review?
- › How should the objectives and eligibility criteria be reported?
- › What details about the search strategy and study selection process are necessary?
- › How should results be summarized and presented?
- › What information should be included about the sources of funding and potential conflicts of interest?
- › How can authors ensure transparency and reproducibility in their scoping review?
References & sources
Related methods
Similar by meaning
Beta record. Based on the original catalogue summary; primary-source enrichment pending.