医学教育中的范围综述：一项范围综述。
Scoping reviews in medical education: A scoping review.
机构信息
Department of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Department of Politics, Security, and International Affairs, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
出版信息
Med Educ. 2021 Jun;55(6):689-700. doi: 10.1111/medu.14431. Epub 2020 Dec 30.
OBJECTIVES
Over the last two decades, the number of scoping reviews in core medical education journals has increased by 4200%. Despite this growth, research on scoping reviews provides limited information about their nature, including how they are conducted or why medical educators undertake this knowledge synthesis type. This gap makes it difficult to know where the field stands and may hamper attempts to improve the conduct, reporting and utility of scoping reviews. Thus, this review characterises the nature of medical education scoping reviews to identify areas for improvement and highlight future research opportunities.
METHOD
The authors searched PubMed for scoping reviews published between 1/1999 and 4/2020 in 14 medical education journals. The authors extracted and summarised key bibliometric data, the rationales given for conducting a scoping review, the research questions and key reporting elements as described in the PRISMA-ScR. Rationales and research questions were mapped to Arksey and O'Malley's reasons for conducting a scoping review.
RESULTS
One hundred and one scoping reviews were included. On average, 10.1 scoping reviews (SD = 13.1, median = 4) were published annually with the most reviews published in 2019 (n = 42). Authors described multiple reasons for undertaking scoping reviews; the most prevalent being to summarise and disseminate research findings (n = 77). In 11 reviews, the rationales for the scoping review and the research questions aligned. No review addressed all elements of the PRISMA-ScR, with few authors publishing a protocol (n = 2) or including stakeholders (n = 20). Authors identified shortcomings of scoping reviews, including lack of critical appraisal.
CONCLUSIONS
Scoping reviews are increasingly conducted in medical education and published by most core journals. Scoping reviews aim to map the depth and breadth of emerging topics; as such, they have the potential to play a critical role in the practice, policy and research of medical education. However, these results suggest improvements are needed for this role to be fully realised.
目的
在过去的二十年中，核心医学教育期刊中范围综述的数量增加了 4200%。尽管数量有所增长，但关于范围综述的研究仅提供了关于其性质的有限信息，包括如何进行范围综述以及医学教育者为何采用这种知识综合类型。这一差距使得我们难以了解该领域的现状，并且可能会阻碍尝试提高范围综述的实施、报告和实用性。因此，本综述旨在描述医学教育范围综述的性质，以确定需要改进的领域，并突出未来的研究机会。
方法
作者在 14 种医学教育期刊中检索了 1999 年 1 月至 2020 年 4 月期间发表的范围综述。作者提取并总结了关键的书目数据、进行范围综述的理由、研究问题以及 PRISMA-ScR 中描述的关键报告要素。理由和研究问题被映射到 Arksey 和 O'Malley 进行范围综述的原因。
结果
共纳入 101 篇范围综述。平均每年发表 10.1 篇（SD=13.1，中位数=4）范围综述，2019 年发表的综述最多（n=42）。作者描述了进行范围综述的多种理由；最常见的是总结和传播研究结果（n=77）。在 11 篇综述中，范围综述的理由和研究问题是一致的。没有一篇综述涵盖了 PRISMA-ScR 的所有要素，很少有作者发表方案（n=2）或纳入利益相关者（n=20）。作者确定了范围综述的缺点，包括缺乏批判性评价。
结论
范围综述在医学教育中越来越多地进行，并由大多数核心期刊发表。范围综述旨在绘制新兴主题的深度和广度；因此，它们有可能在医学教育的实践、政策和研究中发挥关键作用。然而，这些结果表明，需要改进这些综述，以充分发挥其作用。
Zotero 插件