Scoping Review on Rehabilitation Scoping Reviews

To examine the extent, scope, and methodological quality of rehabilitation scoping reviews. A comprehensive list of scoping reviews conducted in the broader health field (inception to July 2014), with a further update of that list (up to February 2017) using similar methods, including searching 9 el...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation Jg. 101; H. 8; S. 1462
Hauptverfasser: Colquhoun, Heather L, Jesus, Tiago S, O'Brien, Kelly K, Tricco, Andrea C, Chui, Adora, Zarin, Wasifa, Lillie, Erin, Hitzig, Sander L, Seaton, Samantha, Engel, Lisa, Rotenberg, Shlomit, Straus, Sharon E
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: United States 01.08.2020
Schlagworte:
ISSN:1532-821X, 1532-821X
Online-Zugang:Weitere Angaben
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Abstract To examine the extent, scope, and methodological quality of rehabilitation scoping reviews. A comprehensive list of scoping reviews conducted in the broader health field (inception to July 2014), with a further update of that list (up to February 2017) using similar methods, including searching 9 electronic databases. Articles were included if they were scoping reviews within rehabilitation. Established review methods were used including (1) a PubMed filter detecting rehabilitation content and (2) title-and-abstract screening by 2 independent reviewers applied sequentially to articles from the existing list of scoping reviews and to the updated search results. Full-text articles were reviewed by 1 reviewer, with discrepancies resolved by another after pilot screening with > 80% agreement. Remaining discrepancies were resolved by external experts. Two independent reviewers used piloted and standardized data extraction forms. We screened 1823 records, including 992 full texts, to identify 251 rehabilitation-related scoping reviews. Rehabilitation scoping reviews had an exponential yearly increase since 2008 (r =0.89; P<.01). The literature addressed diverse topics (eg, spread over 43 condition groupings); 43% were published in Canada. Examples of methodological limitations included: 39% of reviews did not cite the use of a methodological framework, 96% did not include the appropriate flow diagram, 8% did not report eligibility criteria, and 57% did not report data extraction details. The increasing popularity of scoping reviews in rehabilitation has not been met by high standards in methodological quality. To increase the value of rehabilitation scoping reviews, rehabilitation stakeholders need to use existing methodological standards for the conduct, reporting, and appraisal of scoping reviews.
AbstractList To examine the extent, scope, and methodological quality of rehabilitation scoping reviews. A comprehensive list of scoping reviews conducted in the broader health field (inception to July 2014), with a further update of that list (up to February 2017) using similar methods, including searching 9 electronic databases. Articles were included if they were scoping reviews within rehabilitation. Established review methods were used including (1) a PubMed filter detecting rehabilitation content and (2) title-and-abstract screening by 2 independent reviewers applied sequentially to articles from the existing list of scoping reviews and to the updated search results. Full-text articles were reviewed by 1 reviewer, with discrepancies resolved by another after pilot screening with > 80% agreement. Remaining discrepancies were resolved by external experts. Two independent reviewers used piloted and standardized data extraction forms. We screened 1823 records, including 992 full texts, to identify 251 rehabilitation-related scoping reviews. Rehabilitation scoping reviews had an exponential yearly increase since 2008 (r =0.89; P<.01). The literature addressed diverse topics (eg, spread over 43 condition groupings); 43% were published in Canada. Examples of methodological limitations included: 39% of reviews did not cite the use of a methodological framework, 96% did not include the appropriate flow diagram, 8% did not report eligibility criteria, and 57% did not report data extraction details. The increasing popularity of scoping reviews in rehabilitation has not been met by high standards in methodological quality. To increase the value of rehabilitation scoping reviews, rehabilitation stakeholders need to use existing methodological standards for the conduct, reporting, and appraisal of scoping reviews.
To examine the extent, scope, and methodological quality of rehabilitation scoping reviews.OBJECTIVETo examine the extent, scope, and methodological quality of rehabilitation scoping reviews.A comprehensive list of scoping reviews conducted in the broader health field (inception to July 2014), with a further update of that list (up to February 2017) using similar methods, including searching 9 electronic databases.DATA SOURCESA comprehensive list of scoping reviews conducted in the broader health field (inception to July 2014), with a further update of that list (up to February 2017) using similar methods, including searching 9 electronic databases.Articles were included if they were scoping reviews within rehabilitation. Established review methods were used including (1) a PubMed filter detecting rehabilitation content and (2) title-and-abstract screening by 2 independent reviewers applied sequentially to articles from the existing list of scoping reviews and to the updated search results. Full-text articles were reviewed by 1 reviewer, with discrepancies resolved by another after pilot screening with > 80% agreement. Remaining discrepancies were resolved by external experts.STUDY SELECTIONArticles were included if they were scoping reviews within rehabilitation. Established review methods were used including (1) a PubMed filter detecting rehabilitation content and (2) title-and-abstract screening by 2 independent reviewers applied sequentially to articles from the existing list of scoping reviews and to the updated search results. Full-text articles were reviewed by 1 reviewer, with discrepancies resolved by another after pilot screening with > 80% agreement. Remaining discrepancies were resolved by external experts.Two independent reviewers used piloted and standardized data extraction forms.DATA EXTRACTIONTwo independent reviewers used piloted and standardized data extraction forms.We screened 1823 records, including 992 full texts, to identify 251 rehabilitation-related scoping reviews. Rehabilitation scoping reviews had an exponential yearly increase since 2008 (r2=0.89; P<.01). The literature addressed diverse topics (eg, spread over 43 condition groupings); 43% were published in Canada. Examples of methodological limitations included: 39% of reviews did not cite the use of a methodological framework, 96% did not include the appropriate flow diagram, 8% did not report eligibility criteria, and 57% did not report data extraction details.DATA SYNTHESISWe screened 1823 records, including 992 full texts, to identify 251 rehabilitation-related scoping reviews. Rehabilitation scoping reviews had an exponential yearly increase since 2008 (r2=0.89; P<.01). The literature addressed diverse topics (eg, spread over 43 condition groupings); 43% were published in Canada. Examples of methodological limitations included: 39% of reviews did not cite the use of a methodological framework, 96% did not include the appropriate flow diagram, 8% did not report eligibility criteria, and 57% did not report data extraction details.The increasing popularity of scoping reviews in rehabilitation has not been met by high standards in methodological quality. To increase the value of rehabilitation scoping reviews, rehabilitation stakeholders need to use existing methodological standards for the conduct, reporting, and appraisal of scoping reviews.CONCLUSIONSThe increasing popularity of scoping reviews in rehabilitation has not been met by high standards in methodological quality. To increase the value of rehabilitation scoping reviews, rehabilitation stakeholders need to use existing methodological standards for the conduct, reporting, and appraisal of scoping reviews.
Author Lillie, Erin
Tricco, Andrea C
Hitzig, Sander L
Colquhoun, Heather L
Rotenberg, Shlomit
Zarin, Wasifa
Straus, Sharon E
Jesus, Tiago S
O'Brien, Kelly K
Engel, Lisa
Seaton, Samantha
Chui, Adora
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Heather L
  surname: Colquhoun
  fullname: Colquhoun, Heather L
  email: heather.colquhoun@utoronto.ca
  organization: Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (RSI), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: heather.colquhoun@utoronto.ca
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Tiago S
  surname: Jesus
  fullname: Jesus, Tiago S
  organization: Global Health and Tropical Medicine and WHO Collaborating Centre for Health Workforce Policy and Planning, Institute of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine - NOVA University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Kelly K
  surname: O'Brien
  fullname: O'Brien, Kelly K
  organization: Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (RSI), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Andrea C
  surname: Tricco
  fullname: Tricco, Andrea C
  organization: Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Adora
  surname: Chui
  fullname: Chui, Adora
  organization: Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (RSI), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
– sequence: 6
  givenname: Wasifa
  surname: Zarin
  fullname: Zarin, Wasifa
  organization: Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
– sequence: 7
  givenname: Erin
  surname: Lillie
  fullname: Lillie, Erin
  organization: Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
– sequence: 8
  givenname: Sander L
  surname: Hitzig
  fullname: Hitzig, Sander L
  organization: Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (RSI), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; St. John's Rehab Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
– sequence: 9
  givenname: Samantha
  surname: Seaton
  fullname: Seaton, Samantha
  organization: Rehabilitation Sciences Institute (RSI), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
– sequence: 10
  givenname: Lisa
  surname: Engel
  fullname: Engel, Lisa
  organization: Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
– sequence: 11
  givenname: Shlomit
  surname: Rotenberg
  fullname: Rotenberg, Shlomit
  organization: Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
– sequence: 12
  givenname: Sharon E
  surname: Straus
  fullname: Straus, Sharon E
  organization: Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32325163$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNpVj8lKxEAURQtpsQf9ARfSSzeJr-aqpTRO0CA4gLtQqbxoNZlMJYp_b8AWdHXvhcuBsySzpm2QkFMKKQWqLnap6-o-ZcAgBZ4ClQdkQSVniWH0Zfanz8kyxh0AKMnpEZlzxpmkii8IPPq2C83r-gE_An6u22Zqby4PVRjcEKb5_xCPyWHpqogn-1yR5-urp81tsr2_udtcbhMvBAyJttwa6fJCWqQWtDW-EFAYg6gQjdGC577wmjMKYFQpealsKagWwjJlKFuR8x9u17fvI8Yhq0P0WFWuwXaMGeNWTFw92a_I2f465jUWWdeH2vVf2a8l-wY62VTt
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1177_15394492241292438
crossref_primary_10_3389_fphar_2022_748931
crossref_primary_10_3389_fneur_2022_1052294
crossref_primary_10_1097_AJP_0000000000000891
crossref_primary_10_7748_nr_2025_e1963
crossref_primary_10_1111_hsc_14096
crossref_primary_10_1111_medu_14431
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_apmr_2021_05_005
crossref_primary_10_1097_PHM_0000000000001763
crossref_primary_10_1080_09602011_2024_2381874
crossref_primary_10_1136_bmjopen_2023_080878
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_apmr_2020_09_396
crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph18084348
crossref_primary_10_1111_1440_1630_70003
crossref_primary_10_1097_PHM_0000000000002490
crossref_primary_10_3233_WOR_210777
crossref_primary_10_3389_fmed_2022_916602
crossref_primary_10_5014_ajot_2023_050089
crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph19127327
crossref_primary_10_1111_medu_14543
crossref_primary_10_1136_bmjopen_2021_052942
crossref_primary_10_1002_hpm_3691
crossref_primary_10_3389_fresc_2022_849216
crossref_primary_10_1186_s12939_021_01526_y
crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0323344
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jclinepi_2025_111928
crossref_primary_10_1080_09638288_2023_2243583
crossref_primary_10_1080_02699052_2024_2337905
crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph19095307
crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph18126178
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright Copyright © 2020 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright_xml – notice: Copyright © 2020 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
DBID CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7X8
DOI 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.03.015
DatabaseName Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE
MEDLINE - Academic
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: 7X8
  name: MEDLINE - Academic
  url: https://search.proquest.com/medline
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod no_fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
Physical Therapy
EISSN 1532-821X
ExternalDocumentID 32325163
Genre Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Journal Article
Scoping Review
GroupedDBID ---
--K
-~X
.1-
.55
.FO
.GJ
07C
0R~
1B1
1CY
1P~
1~5
23N
3O-
4.4
41~
457
4G.
53G
5GY
5RE
5VS
6J9
7-5
AAEDT
AAEDW
AALRI
AAQFI
AAQOH
AAQQT
AAQXK
AAWTL
AAXUO
AAYWO
ABDQB
ABFRF
ABJNI
ABLJU
ABMAC
ABOCM
ABWVN
ACBNA
ACGFO
ACGUR
ACRPL
ADBBV
ADMUD
ADNMO
ADRMJ
AEFWE
AENEX
AEVXI
AFCTW
AFFNX
AFJKZ
AFRHN
AFTJW
AGCQF
AGNAY
AGQPQ
AI.
AIGII
AITUG
AJUYK
AKRWK
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AMRAJ
APXCP
ASPBG
AVWKF
AZFZN
BELOY
BR6
C5W
CAG
CGR
COF
CS3
CUY
CVF
E3Z
EBS
ECM
EFJIC
EFKBS
EIF
EJD
F5P
FDB
FEDTE
FGOYB
FIRID
G-Q
GBLVA
HVGLF
HZ~
IHE
J1W
J5H
K-O
KOM
KOO
L7B
M41
MO0
N4W
NEJ
NPM
NQ-
O-3
O9-
OH.
OHT
OK1
OT.
P2P
QTD
QZG
R2-
RIG
ROL
RPZ
SEL
SES
SJN
SKT
SSZ
TWZ
UDS
UGJ
UHB
UHS
UPT
UQV
UV1
VH1
WH7
WHG
X7M
XH2
XOL
YQJ
YRY
YZZ
Z5R
ZGI
ZXP
~S-
7X8
ABUFD
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c440t-793985abd59e190798cd40d88ee6ee88743bcdc73210086f53f69f41744926812
IEDL.DBID 7X8
ISICitedReferencesCount 36
ISICitedReferencesURI http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000554905500020&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
ISSN 1532-821X
IngestDate Sun Nov 09 10:13:42 EST 2025
Mon Jul 21 05:27:06 EDT 2025
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 8
Keywords Rehabilitation
Review
Language English
License Copyright © 2020 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c440t-793985abd59e190798cd40d88ee6ee88743bcdc73210086f53f69f41744926812
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
PMID 32325163
PQID 2394907720
PQPubID 23479
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_2394907720
pubmed_primary_32325163
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2020-08-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2020-08-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 08
  year: 2020
  text: 2020-08-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
PublicationTitle Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation
PublicationTitleAlternate Arch Phys Med Rehabil
PublicationYear 2020
References 33248686 - Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021 Feb;102(2):340. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.09.396
33334548 - Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021 Feb;102(2):340-342. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.10.121
References_xml – reference: 33248686 - Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021 Feb;102(2):340. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.09.396
– reference: 33334548 - Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021 Feb;102(2):340-342. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.10.121
SSID ssj0006531
Score 2.484274
SecondaryResourceType review_article
Snippet To examine the extent, scope, and methodological quality of rehabilitation scoping reviews. A comprehensive list of scoping reviews conducted in the broader...
To examine the extent, scope, and methodological quality of rehabilitation scoping reviews.OBJECTIVETo examine the extent, scope, and methodological quality of...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
StartPage 1462
SubjectTerms Humans
Rehabilitation
Research Design - standards
Scholarly Communication - trends
Scoping Reviews As Topic
Title Scoping Review on Rehabilitation Scoping Reviews
URI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32325163
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2394907720
Volume 101
WOSCitedRecordID wos000554905500020&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
hasFullText
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1LS8QwEB7UFfHi6vpaX1TwGkyT9JGTiLh4cJcFV-itNGkCHmxXu_r7nbRZVg-C4KX00EKZzEy_yWS-D-BKShWLyHJCTSqJSBknUktKpFVlGGutE9Wqljwmk0maZXLqN9waf6xymRPbRF3W2u2RXzsJbyzkEkZv5m_EqUa57qqX0FiHHkco4wIzyVZs4XHEPV8qRj0LMz80053vKuavjg-U0ZbkNIx-h5jtr2bU_-9H7sKOB5nBbecVe7BmqgFsjX0bfQD9qV-dYNaRCuwDfdLt6FTQNQuCusK77yTewc8HmgN4Ht3P7h6IV1MgWgi6IBiIMo0KVUbSIApIpJMtomWaGhMbg7lGcKVLnbihHqxzbMRtLK3AisVxCiIOOISNqq7MMQRMKyosV6xkpeBCIchUgtuSca5DroohXC7Nk6O3uhZEUZn6o8lXBhrCUWfjfN7RauQcwV2E8PDkD2-fwrZbuu4k3hn0LMaqOYdN_bl4ad4vWjfA62Q6_gJjsrpQ
linkProvider ProQuest
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Scoping+Review+on+Rehabilitation+Scoping+Reviews&rft.jtitle=Archives+of+physical+medicine+and+rehabilitation&rft.au=Colquhoun%2C+Heather+L&rft.au=Jesus%2C+Tiago+S&rft.au=O%27Brien%2C+Kelly+K&rft.au=Tricco%2C+Andrea+C&rft.date=2020-08-01&rft.issn=1532-821X&rft.eissn=1532-821X&rft.volume=101&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1462&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.apmr.2020.03.015&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1532-821X&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1532-821X&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1532-821X&client=summon