Campbell Fiona, Sutton Anthea, Pollock Danielle, Garritty Chantelle, Tricco Andrea C, Schmidt Lena, Khalil Hanan
Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon tyne, UK
ScHARR, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2025 Jul 21;30(4):268-277. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112389.
Scoping, mapping and evidence and gap map reviews (‘Big Picture Reviews’ (BPRs)) are evidence synthesis methods that address broad research questions. They provide an overview of existing evidence, identify gaps in knowledge and priorities for research. Unlike systematic reviews (SRs) of effectiveness, they do not seek to synthesise findings but to provide a description of the evidence. There has been a growth in the production of rapid BPRs to meet commissioners’ and knowledge users’ (KUs) needs for timely outputs. No guidance currently exists for the use of rapid approaches in BPRs, and the purpose of this paper is to address this lack. Rapid reviews include simplifying or omitting a variety of methods; however, the approaches may have varying impacts on processes and findings in different types of reviews and should be done with reference to the standard approaches for that particular methodology. BPRs differ from SRs of effectiveness, in terms of their purpose, addressing a broad research question, rather than a specific question which fits a population, intervention, comparator and outcome (PICO) framework. Developing and refining the research question and search strategy may need more time than in a SR. Search yields are typically larger with a greater proportion of time spent on identifying evidence for inclusion when compared with SRs. They do not involve a synthesis of included studies, so the impact of missing data may have less influence on the rigour of the findings than in SRs of the effect of an intervention where a pooled estimate is reported. This paper addresses these differences, and the implications of rapid approaches to BPRs, with recommendations for practice that aim to increase efficiency while maintaining rigour.
范围界定、映射以及证据与差距图谱综述（“全景综述”（BPRs））是用于解决广泛研究问题的证据综合方法。它们提供现有证据的概述，识别知识差距和研究重点。与有效性的系统综述（SRs）不同，它们并非旨在综合研究结果，而是对证据进行描述。为满足委托方和知识使用者（KUs）对及时产出的需求，快速BPRs的数量有所增加。目前尚无关于在BPRs中使用快速方法的指南，本文旨在填补这一空白。快速综述包括简化或省略各种方法；然而，这些方法在不同类型的综述中对过程和结果可能有不同影响，应参照该特定方法的标准方法进行。BPRs在目的方面与有效性的SRs不同，BPRs解决的是广泛的研究问题，而非适合人群、干预措施、对照和结局（PICO）框架的具体问题。与系统综述相比，制定和完善研究问题及检索策略可能需要更多时间。与系统综述相比，检索结果通常更多，且花费在识别纳入证据上的时间比例更大。它们不涉及对纳入研究的综合，因此与报告汇总估计值的干预效果系统综述相比，缺失数据对结果严谨性的影响可能较小。本文阐述了这些差异以及快速方法对BPRs的影响，并提出了旨在提高效率同时保持严谨性的实践建议。
