Chaves Leandra Vilela Rodrigues, Sousa Marcos de Moraes, Costa Woska Pires da, Traguetto Jéssica, Cardoso Flávio Manoel Coelho Borges, Matos-Torres Miguel de
Business, Accounting and Economics Faculty, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.
Instituto Federal Goiano, Campus Rio Verde, Rio Verde, Goiás, Brazil.
PLoS One. 2025 Aug 28;20(8):e0329904. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0329904. eCollection 2025.
Enhancing performance in the public sector is closely tied to institutional structures, governance models, and the behavior of public officials. In the Judiciary, these factors significantly affect the effectiveness of court administration and justice delivery. Judicial governance is a complex and evolving concept encompassing standards and practices related to accountability, independence, resource management, and institutional performance, progressively integrating principles from public management reforms. Despite its growing relevance, the field remains fragmented, with limited evidence connecting international standards to best governance practices in judicial administration.
This protocol outlines a scoping review designed to identify, map, and synthesize evidence on best practices in judicial governance, examining their relationship with the effective administration of justice and identifying research gaps to propose a future research agenda.
This review will follow the JBI methodology and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A comprehensive search will be conducted in databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, DOAJ, and JSTOR, as well as additional searches in grey literature. The PCC (Population, Concept, and Context) framework guided the eligibility criteria, and the PRESS 2015 checklist was used to validate the search strategy. The PRISMA-S checklist will inform the reporting of the search process. Studies of all designs and publication statuses will be considered, with no restrictions on language or publication date. Two reviewers will independently screen using Rayyan software, with a third reviewer resolving any disagreements. Data extraction will occur at two levels: general source information and specific content related to the review scope. Qualitative data will be analyzed using NVivo software, enabling categorization, descriptive synthesis, gap identification, and the development of a research agenda.
This scoping review aims to generate key evidence that can inform institutional standards and best governance practices to support evidence-based policymaking; while it does not assess the risk of bias, its systematic methodology and inclusion of grey literature enhance its relevance for future research and innovations in the justice sector. Through this scoping review, key evidence will generate insights that can enhance institutional standards and best practices in governance, enabling evidence-based policymaking. Although the review does not assess the risk of bias, its systematic approach and inclusion of grey literature strengthen its potential to support future research and governance innovations in the justice sector.
OSF Registries, Jan 21, 2024: https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/agv3b.
提高公共部门的绩效与制度结构、治理模式以及公职人员的行为密切相关。在司法部门,这些因素会显著影响法院行政和司法服务的有效性。司法治理是一个复杂且不断演变的概念,涵盖与问责制、独立性、资源管理和机构绩效相关的标准和实践,并逐渐融入公共管理改革的原则。尽管其相关性日益增加,但该领域仍较为分散,将国际标准与司法行政最佳治理实践联系起来的证据有限。
本方案概述了一项范围综述,旨在识别、梳理并综合有关司法治理最佳实践的证据,考察其与有效司法行政的关系,找出研究差距,以提出未来的研究议程。
本综述将遵循JBI方法和PRISMA-ScR指南。将在Scopus、科学网、DOAJ和JSTOR等数据库中进行全面检索,并对灰色文献进行额外检索。PCC(人群、概念和背景)框架指导了纳入标准,PRESS 2015清单用于验证检索策略。PRISMA-S清单将为检索过程的报告提供指导。将考虑所有设计和出版状态的研究,对语言或出版日期不设限制。两名评审员将使用Rayyan软件独立筛选,第三名评审员解决任何分歧。数据提取将在两个层面进行:一般来源信息和与综述范围相关的具体内容。将使用NVivo软件对定性数据进行分析,以便进行分类、描述性综合、识别差距并制定研究议程。
本范围综述旨在生成关键证据,为制度标准和最佳治理实践提供参考,以支持循证决策;虽然它不评估偏倚风险,但其系统方法和对灰色文献的纳入增强了其对司法部门未来研究和创新的相关性。通过本范围综述,关键证据将产生见解,可提高制度标准和治理最佳实践,实现循证决策。尽管该综述不评估偏倚风险,但其系统方法和对灰色文献的纳入增强了其支持司法部门未来研究和治理创新的潜力。
OSF注册库,2024年1月21日:https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/agv3b 。