Systematic Review |
Scoping Review |
Integrative Review |
---|---|---|
"Systematic reviews aim to identify, evaluate, and summarize the findings of all relevant individual studies over a health-related issue, thereby making the available evidence more accessible to decision makers" (Ganeshkumar & Gopalakrishnan, 2013). | "A scoping review... is a form of knowledge synthesis that addresses an exploratory research question aimed at mapping key concepts, types of evidence, and gaps in research related to a defined area or field by systematically searching, selecting, and synthesizing existing knowledge" (Colquhoun et al., 2014). | "Integrative reviews, thus, have the potential to build nursing science, informing research, practice, and policy initiatives. The integrative review method allows for the inclusion of diverse methodologies (i.e. experimental and non-experimental research" (Whittemore and Knafl, 2005). |
Systematic reviews seek to:
|
Scoping reviews may seek to:
|
Integrative reviews seek to:
|
"If the authors have a more precise question addressing the feasibility, appropriateness, meaningfulness or effectiveness of a certain treatment or practice, then a systematic review is likely the most valid approach" (Munn et al, 2018). | "If authors do not have single or precise questions, and are more interested in the identification of certain characteristics/concepts in papers or studies, and in the mapping, reporting or discussion of these characteristics/concepts, then a scoping review is the better choice" (Munn et al, 2018). | If using diverse data sources to develop holistic understanding of the topic of interest by presenting the state of the science and contributing to theory development an integrative review should be performed (da Silva et al, 2020). |