Post Your Answer
1 year ago in Academic Publishing , Research Methodology By Princy
Are the key gaps in the literature clearly identified and discussed as a primary outcome?
I'm in the final stages of writing up a scoping review for publication, and I’m grappling with how to convincingly demonstrate its methodological soundness to reviewers. I want to ensure my manuscript meets the highest standards of transparency and utility. Could you walk us through the key elements I should be scrutinizing in my own work and in the literature I assess?
Â
All Answers (1 Answers In All)
By Rohini Singh Answered 9 months ago
Based on my experience both conducting and reviewing scoping reviews, the checklist items you're referencing are spot-on. I always recommend treating the identification of gaps not as a byproduct, but as a primary, stated outcome. You must explicitly state the review's own process limitations like my recent work where we acknowledged our English-language bias. This honesty directly fuels the "so what?" by allowing you to propose specific, actionable studies. Crucially, avoid overreaching conclusions; a scoping review maps the terrain, it doesn't judge the quality of the landmarks.
Â
Reply to Rohini Singh
Related Questions