Advertisement
Letter to the Editor|Articles in Press

Mapping review could be seen as a sub-type of scoping review, and differentiating between the action of mapping evidence and presentation of evidence as maps may be helpful: response to Khalil et al

  • Yen-Fu Chen
    Correspondence
    Correspondence: Dr Yen-Fu Chen, tel: +44(0)24 765 24936
    Affiliations
    Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom
    Search for articles by this author
  • Yemisi Takwoingi
    Affiliations
    Test Evaluation Research Group, Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, United Kingdom

    NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TH, United Kingdom
    Search for articles by this author
  • Amy Grove
    Affiliations
    Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom
    Search for articles by this author
Published:February 18, 2023DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.02.017
Mapping review could be seen as a sub-type of scoping review, and differentiating between the action of mapping evidence and presentation of evidence as maps may be helpful: response to Khalil et al
Previous ArticleWeekly updating of guideline recommendations was feasible: the Australian National COVID-19 clinical evidence Taskforce
Next ArticleDifferentiating between mapping reviews and evidence gap maps
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Register: Create an account
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      Article info

      Publication history

      Accepted: February 15, 2023
      Received: January 27, 2023

      Publication stage

      In Press Journal Pre-Proof

      Identification

      DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.02.017

      Copyright

      © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      ScienceDirect

      Access this article on ScienceDirect

      Linked Article

      • Differentiating between mapping reviews and evidence gap maps
        Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
        • Preview
          Thank you for the opportunity to reply back to the letter entitled “Mapping review could be seen as a subtype of scoping review and differentiating between the action of mapping evidence and presentation of evidence as maps may be helpful.” While we agree that there are many similarities between scoping reviews and mapping reviews, we disagree that mapping reviews are a subtype of scoping reviews. The main difference lies in the actual research question they address. Scoping reviews tend to answer questions about “what the evidence states” as opposed to “where the evidence is.” [1] In general, scoping reviews include extensive data extraction using either an inductive or deductive approach [2].
        • Full-Text
        • PDF
      We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. To update your cookie settings, please visit the for this site.
      Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties. The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.


      RELX