Purpose The aim of this article is to provide detailed information on scoping reviews, including definition, related processes, and differences between scoping reviews and systematic reviews, and to discuss the limitations of scoping reviews.
Methods: This article briefly introduces the researchers to the purpose of a scoping review, methodological framework and related examples, limitations and useful tips for conducting a scoping review.
Results: A scoping review is a relatively new approach of evidence synthesis that provides an overview/map of the available research evidence without generating a summary estimation. Therefore, scoping reviews are particularly useful when a body of literature has not yet been comprehensively examined, or has a complex or heterogeneous phenomena unsuitable for conducting systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence.
Conclusion: Because of the variability in the methods of performing scoping review, there is a need for methodological standardization to improve the utility and robustness of review findings.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Assessing Learning Outcomes in Simulation-based Education to Recognize and Respond to Deteriorating Patients in Nursing Education: A Scoping Review Yi Kyung Ha Journal of Korean Critical Care Nursing.2025; 18(1): 39. CrossRef
Research trends in interprofessional education programs related to medication for undergraduate nursing students: a scoping review Chaeyoon Jung, Jaeuk Oh, Sang Hui Chu Journal of Korean Biological Nursing Science.2024; 26(2): 83. CrossRef
A Scoping Review of Research Trends in Forest Therapy Programs by Subject Types: Focused on KCD-8 Gyeong-Min Min, Poung-Sik Yeon, Jin-Gun Kim Journal of People, Plants, and Environment.2024; 27(2): 143. CrossRef
A Scoping Review on Burnout among Dental Hygienists in South Korea Yang-Keum Han, An-Na Yeo Journal of Dental Hygiene Science.2024; 24(2): 71. CrossRef
Strategies in Ecological Momentary Interventions for Mental Health Care in Adults: A Scoping Review Gi Wook Ryu Journal of Digital Contents Society.2024; 25(4): 961. CrossRef
Health Literacy in Fall-Prevention Strategy: A Scoping Review Yusun Park, Sung Reul Kim, Hyun-Ju Seo, Jeonghyun Cho Asian Nursing Research.2024; 18(5): 532. CrossRef
Oral Hygiene Care of Endotracheal Intubated Patients in Korean Intensive Care Units : A Scoping Review Jungeun Lim, Dukyoo Jung, Leeho Yoo Journal of Korean Critical Care Nursing.2024; 17(1): 68. CrossRef
Simulation-Based Education for Recognizing and Responding to Deteriorating Patients in Korean Nursing Curricula: A Scoping Review Yi Kyung Ha, Hye Jin Kang Korean Journal of Adult Nursing.2024; 36(4): 261. CrossRef
Research trends in nurse–parent partnership: A scoping review of the paediatric field in South Korea Seo Jin Park, Ji Yeong Yun, Jina Lee, In Young Cho Nursing Open.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Constipation among Korean older adults in long-term care facilities: A scoping review Yuseon Jeong, Dukyoo Jung, Eunju Choi Journal of Korean Gerontological Nursing.2024; 26(1): 4. CrossRef
The experience of fathers whose infants were hospitalized in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit in South Korea: A scoping review Jiyeon Lee, Sunyeob Choi Journal of Pediatric Nursing.2023; 72: 36. CrossRef
Prehospital triage in emergency medical services system: A scoping review Kisook Kim, Booyoung Oh International Emergency Nursing.2023; 69: 101293. CrossRef
An analysis of research trend on infection control in dental hygiene: a scoping review
Journal of Korean Society of Dental Hygiene.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Fire Response Education for Hospital Healthcare Providers: A Scoping Review Min-Ji Kim, Seung-Eun Lee, Hyun-Eun Park Quality Improvement in Health Care.2023; 29(2): 32. CrossRef
Exploring the Roles and Outcomes of Nurse Educators in Hospitals: A Scoping Review Soyoung Kim, Sujin Shin, Inyoung Lee Korean Medical Education Review.2023; 25(1): 55. CrossRef
A scoping review of music-based interventions for swallowing difficulties: implications for treating older adults with presbyphagia Soo Ji Kim, Myung Sun Yeo, So Yeon Kim, Seo Yeon Kang Frontiers in Medicine.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Effectiveness of Devices for Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: A scoping Review Soo Youn Jung, Mina Park, Kyoung Ja Moon Korean Journal of Adult Nursing.2022; 34(2): 123. CrossRef
Research Trends of Follow-Up Care after Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Graduation for Children Born Preterm: A Scoping Review So Ra Kang, Haeryun Cho International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2021; 18(6): 3268. CrossRef
A Scoping Review of Urban Livability Indicators Sunmin Jun, Jeongwoo Yoon, JiYong Park, Juchul Jung Journal of the Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation.2021; 21(5): 281. CrossRef
This study was performed to examine the safety of the Aldrete Scoring system and the reliability of 8 objective non-invasive methods in the evaluation of post-anesthesia recovery. Aldrete Score(AS) and Maximum Inspiratory Force(MIF), Hand Muscle Grip Power(HMGP), Respiratory Frequency(RF), Tidal Volume(V(T)), Arterial Oxygen Saturation(SaO2), systolic blood pressure(sBP), heart rate(HR), and orientation were measured in the pre-anesthesia period, at the arrival in recovery room and using the AS 10, in 137 patients during a 3 month in 1998 at K hospital. Data obtained by the objective non-invasive methods of the AS 10 were compared with their relevant recovery criteria to the 8 objective non-invasive methods by the use of the t-test. The results were as follows: 1. The MIF of 63 patients using the AS 10 was below the discharge criteria from recovery room(DCrm), but the mean MIF(-34.6 +/- 23.4 cmH2O) was above the DCrm. Women, over 30 years of age or weighing below 60kg, showed significant differences from those whose MIF was below the DCrm(P<0.05). 2. V(T) of 118 patients at AS 10 was below their DCrm and the mean V(T)(3.5 +/- 1.4ml/kg) was significant 19 lower than difference below the DCrm(P<0.01). Women were more commonly present among those who V(T) was below the DCrm. 3. SaO2 of 2 patients using the AS 10 was below their DCrm, but the mean SaO2(98.0 +/- 0.8%) was above the DCrm. 4. HMGP and orientation using the AS 10 were above their DCrm. 5. RF, systolic blood pressure and pulse rate using the AS 10 were within the range of their DCrm. 6. V(T), MIF and SaO2 of some patients, who complained of general malaise or respiratory difficulty during the postanesthesia 24 hours, were less than DCrm. The Above results showed that AS 10 alone was not enough to fulfil the recovery discharge criteria of MIF, V(T) and SaO2, Hence some objective non-invasive monitorings such as SaO2, MIF and V(T) need to be adopted to secure the safe recovery in the recovery room.
Cancer has been the leading cause of death in this country and produces high levels of stress not only in the patients themselves but also in their families. Caregiving during serious illness is a new experience for many family caregivers and social support and coping strategies have been found to reduce unfavorable health outcomes to stressful events such as cancer. The purpose of this investigation was to identify the relationship of caregiving stress, coping methods, social support, and health in caregivers of patients with cancer according to the phases of cancer illness. The subjects were 92 primary cargivers of cancer patients based on their phases of illness that consisted of 1st (initial) stage, 2nd (metastatic or recurring) stage, 3rd (terminal) stage recruited from two general hospitals in Seoul and Choongnam. The mean age of subjects was 39.1 years and 64.1% of subjects were female and 72.8% were married. The relationships to the patient were children(50%) or spouses (45.7%). According as the phase of illness progressed, caregiver's stress rose higher and their health got worse but coping methods and social support did not show a significant change. In the 1st stage the major predictors for the health of caregivers were family network support(R2=0.261, p=0.003) and the stress of the caregivers (R2=0.168, P=0.007). In the 2nd stage the most important predictor for the health of the caregivers was the stress of the caregivers (R2=0.483, P=0.000). Also in the 3rd stage the main predictor for health was the stress of the caregivers (R2=0.381, p=0.006). A better understanding of the stress process in family caregivers is needed so that nurses can provide family-centered care, taking into account caregiver, as well as patient, well-being.
E-SUBMISSION
First
Prev
