Institute of Special Education Studies, Faculty of Education, Palacký University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Nurs Health Sci. 2020 Sep;22(3):557-562. doi: 10.1111/nhs.12694. Epub 2020 Mar 9.
The scoping review is one of the alternatives of producing a literature review. However, this approach still lacks a clearly accepted definition, and the scoping terminology is also somewhat fuzzy. Although the methodology of scoping review processing is relatively uniform, terminological chaos appears in the titles of studies with scoping review methodology. This paper presents an analysis of selected published studies with a focus on the content of their titles. A total of 13 thematic dimensions were identified covering the content of titles that show a degree of inconsistency and frequent terminological and methodological "chaos." This study includes a broad scope of themes and areas for which scoping reviews were produced. We would like to recommend to authors (especially scoping review beginners) to - if not necessary or desirable - avoid introducing new concepts and specifications of titles of produced and published scoping review studies. In the case of literature reviews and knowledge synthesis it is necessary to search according to specific keywords and search phrases - more fragmented scoping review terminology makes literature search more difficult or even impossible.
系统评价是文献综述的一种替代方法。然而，这种方法仍然缺乏一个明确接受的定义，并且系统评价的术语也有些模糊。尽管系统评价处理的方法学相对统一，但在具有系统评价方法学的研究标题中出现了术语混乱。本文对选定的已发表研究进行了分析，重点是其标题的内容。总共确定了 13 个主题维度，涵盖了标题内容，表明存在一定程度的不一致和频繁的术语和方法学“混乱”。本研究包括广泛的主题和领域，这些领域产生了范围界定审查。我们想建议作者（特别是范围界定审查初学者）-如果没有必要或不希望-避免在制作和发表的范围界定审查研究的标题中引入新概念和规范。在文献综述和知识综合的情况下，有必要根据特定的关键词和搜索短语进行搜索-更分散的范围界定审查术语使文献搜索更加困难，甚至不可能。
