WEBVTT 1 00:00:01.570 --> 00:00:02.450 Welcome to module 2 00:00:02.589 --> 00:00:06.480 two of the Evidence analysis Center orientation tutorial. 3 00:00:07.320 --> 00:00:11.609 The title of this module is Evidence Analysis Center scoping reviews. 4 00:00:13.640 --> 00:00:15.569 Upon completion of module two, 5 00:00:15.899 --> 00:00:18.840 you will understand the definition of a scoping review. 6 00:00:19.479 --> 00:00:22.370 How a scoping review differs from a systematic review, 7 00:00:23.059 --> 00:00:26.920 the evidence analysis center process for conducting a scoping review 8 00:00:27.389 --> 00:00:32.229 and how the evidence analysis center uses the results of its scoping reviews. 9 00:00:35.299 --> 00:00:36.319 Let's get started. 10 00:00:37.990 --> 00:00:41.250 A scoping review is a form of Knowledge synthesis 11 00:00:41.459 --> 00:00:44.610 that addresses an exploratory research question 12 00:00:44.959 --> 00:00:48.409 aimed at mapping key concepts types of evidence 13 00:00:48.419 --> 00:00:52.009 and gaps in research by systematically searching, 14 00:00:52.040 --> 00:00:53.040 selecting 15 00:00:53.189 --> 00:00:55.689 and synthesizing existing knowledge. 16 00:00:58.569 --> 00:01:02.220 Let's look at why the academy started conducting scoping reviews. 17 00:01:02.970 --> 00:01:04.589 Here are four top reasons 18 00:01:05.348 --> 00:01:09.528 to examine the extent range and nature of available research on a topic 19 00:01:10.449 --> 00:01:13.120 to summarize in the seminate research findings, 20 00:01:13.949 --> 00:01:16.699 to identify research gaps in the literature 21 00:01:17.319 --> 00:01:21.580 and to determine the value of undertaking a full systematic review. 22 00:01:24.330 --> 00:01:26.889 Scoping reviews are relatively new. 23 00:01:27.489 --> 00:01:31.629 This table highlights several differences between a scoping review 24 00:01:31.900 --> 00:01:33.309 and a systematic review. 25 00:01:33.949 --> 00:01:37.050 A scoping review starts with a broad research question 26 00:01:37.290 --> 00:01:40.230 to investigate what research has been done in the field, 27 00:01:41.089 --> 00:01:45.910 defining inclusion and exclusion criteria is fundamental for rigorous search. 28 00:01:46.669 --> 00:01:49.500 A major difference between these two forms of review 29 00:01:49.620 --> 00:01:54.019 is that a risk of bias assessment is not required for a scope and review. 30 00:01:54.650 --> 00:01:58.470 Also a synthesis of findings from individual studies 31 00:01:58.680 --> 00:02:01.110 and the generation of a summary of findings 32 00:02:01.120 --> 00:02:04.830 narrative and table is required for a systematic review 33 00:02:05.470 --> 00:02:10.570 scope and reviews can take 4 to 6 months to complete compared to a systematic review, 34 00:02:10.580 --> 00:02:13.110 which can take 12 to 16 months to complete. 35 00:02:13.899 --> 00:02:16.309 Although conducted for different purposes, 36 00:02:16.350 --> 00:02:21.050 scoping and systematic reviews but require rigorous and transparent methods 37 00:02:21.270 --> 00:02:23.839 to ensure that the results are trustworthy. 38 00:02:26.679 --> 00:02:31.100 We will now review the process followed by the Academy's Evidence Analysis Center 39 00:02:33.779 --> 00:02:38.050 in 2018. The evidence analysis center developed this framework 40 00:02:38.419 --> 00:02:43.250 as you can see conducting a scoping review is one of the first steps in the process. 41 00:02:43.669 --> 00:02:47.330 The result will determine if a systematic review is warranted. 42 00:02:53.429 --> 00:02:56.940 There are five steps in the evidence analysis sensor process 43 00:02:57.320 --> 00:02:58.410 to find a scope, 44 00:02:58.820 --> 00:03:01.009 collaborate with content advisors 45 00:03:01.270 --> 00:03:03.149 develop the search strategy, 46 00:03:03.339 --> 00:03:05.029 extract and map the data 47 00:03:05.449 --> 00:03:08.210 and finally collate and summarize the results. 48 00:03:12.369 --> 00:03:14.789 A scoping review requires teamwork 49 00:03:15.119 --> 00:03:18.369 and evidence analysis and scope and review. Project team 50 00:03:18.490 --> 00:03:20.759 is comprised of a project manager, 51 00:03:20.880 --> 00:03:25.350 lead analyst, content advisors who are experts in the topic area, 52 00:03:25.690 --> 00:03:26.639 a methodologies 53 00:03:27.179 --> 00:03:28.750 and a medical librarian. 54 00:03:31.610 --> 00:03:33.990 Let's discuss the process in more detail. 55 00:03:34.369 --> 00:03:36.740 A scope and review will include 2 to 3 topic 56 00:03:36.750 --> 00:03:40.630 experts who are responsible for developing the research question. 57 00:03:41.139 --> 00:03:45.529 They helped develop the search plan including identifying relevant search terms. 58 00:03:46.020 --> 00:03:49.190 The medical librarian conducts a comprehensive search 59 00:03:49.399 --> 00:03:52.199 using multiple databases and hand searches. 60 00:03:52.649 --> 00:03:56.860 It is not unusual for the search to produce 5000 or 10,000 hits. 61 00:03:57.630 --> 00:04:00.369 The project manager and lead analyst screen the title 62 00:04:00.500 --> 00:04:02.130 abstracts and articles. 63 00:04:02.289 --> 00:04:06.970 Finally, the project manager will map the extracted data and analyze the results. 64 00:04:10.039 --> 00:04:12.179 This scoping review is available 65 00:04:12.399 --> 00:04:14.910 on the evidence analysis library website. In 66 00:04:15.300 --> 00:04:19.850 this example, the topic list indicates when the scoping review is in progress. 67 00:04:20.298 --> 00:04:23.820 The review information is available within the project topic. 68 00:04:27.329 --> 00:04:30.470 This is an example from the celiac disease scoping review. 69 00:04:30.820 --> 00:04:35.529 Not a link to the scoping review information is located in the left navigation bar. 70 00:04:36.000 --> 00:04:39.820 Just a reminder that the most current information is located at the top. 71 00:04:40.570 --> 00:04:45.140 The scoping review helped focus the scope of the celiac disease guideline update. 72 00:04:48.119 --> 00:04:52.519 This is an example of a visual representation of a scoping review results. 73 00:04:52.929 --> 00:04:55.700 This is a bubble chart of original research published 74 00:04:55.709 --> 00:04:58.899 by year and topics for celiac disease scoping review. 75 00:04:59.640 --> 00:05:03.869 The bubble size is proportional to the number of original research studies 76 00:05:04.019 --> 00:05:06.179 published in the year and topic. 77 00:05:09.100 --> 00:05:11.290 This illustration is an example of a 78 00:05:11.299 --> 00:05:14.380 heat map representing the distribution of outcomes 79 00:05:14.410 --> 00:05:17.920 assessed in the included original intervention studies 80 00:05:17.929 --> 00:05:20.720 by study design and type of intervention. 81 00:05:21.309 --> 00:05:24.600 The red section represents the highest number of studies 82 00:05:24.850 --> 00:05:29.089 yellow represents the number of studies at around the 50th percentile 83 00:05:29.579 --> 00:05:32.119 green represents the lowest number of studies 84 00:05:32.859 --> 00:05:38.459 in the columns, et represents experimental trials and OS observational studies 85 00:05:38.790 --> 00:05:42.609 T is a total number of studies within each type of intervention. 86 00:05:45.959 --> 00:05:48.260 This is an example of an overview 87 00:05:48.440 --> 00:05:52.359 of included research studies for the nutritional genomic scoping review. 88 00:05:52.809 --> 00:05:54.660 This information was used to develop the 89 00:05:54.670 --> 00:05:57.290 search criteria for the systematic review. 90 00:06:00.500 --> 00:06:04.040 Here are examples of scope and review results which are published 91 00:06:04.049 --> 00:06:06.790 in the journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. 92 00:06:10.410 --> 00:06:12.290 Once the scoping review is complete, 93 00:06:12.369 --> 00:06:14.989 the project manager will use the results to 94 00:06:15.000 --> 00:06:17.109 determine the need for a systematic review. 95 00:06:18.040 --> 00:06:22.019 The results will be used to focus the scope of the system, a review 96 00:06:22.140 --> 00:06:24.380 and to develop the PIC O questions. 97 00:06:24.799 --> 00:06:26.899 The results are promoted via articles in 98 00:06:26.910 --> 00:06:29.899 peer reviewed journals and at meeting presentations. 99 00:06:32.790 --> 00:06:34.519 This concludes module two. 100 00:06:34.869 --> 00:06:39.570 Please proceed to module three, the evidence analysis center systematic review. 101 00:06:40.040 --> 00:06:40.600 Thank you.