How Scoping Reviews Contribute to the Development of New Research Questions

Introduction

One of the most valuable outcomes of a scoping review is not just summarizing what exists, but also illuminating what we still don’t know.
By systematically mapping the breadth of literature, scoping reviews naturally generate new, targeted research questions — the building blocks of future studies.

1. From Mapping to Question Generation

A scoping review:

Identifies coverage → What topics, populations, and interventions are well-studied.
Exposes blind spots → Where data is limited, outdated, or absent.
Suggests directions → Areas worth deeper exploration through systematic reviews, randomized trials, or qualitative studies.

2. Examples of Question Development

Let’s say a scoping review on digital mental health interventions finds:

Abundant research on adults.
Very few studies on adolescents.
No consistent reporting on long-term outcomes.

New research questions might include:

What is the effectiveness of mobile mental health apps for adolescents compared to adults?
How do digital interventions impact mental health outcomes over 12 months or longer?

3. Why Scoping Reviews Are Effective for This Purpose

Breadth-first approach captures diverse methodologies, contexts, and populations.
Non-restrictive inclusion criteria ensure potentially relevant but unconventional studies are not excluded.
Trend analysis shows shifts in focus over time, highlighting outdated or neglected areas.

4. Turning Knowledge Gaps Into Researchable Questions

Steps:

Categorize gaps (population, intervention, setting, outcome).
Assess feasibility — Which gaps can realistically be addressed by research teams?
Refine scope — Use frameworks like PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) to convert gaps into structured questions.

5. Influence on Policy and Funding Priorities

Research funders often use scoping reviews to:

Identify strategic research areas.
Justify funding calls targeted at specific evidence gaps.
Ensure public resources are spent where the potential for impact is highest.

6. Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Overly vague questions – Avoid questions too broad to be answered.
Redundant questions – Ensure new questions haven’t already been addressed in recent studies.
Ignoring context – Consider cultural, socioeconomic, and healthcare system differences before forming questions.

Conclusion

Scoping reviews are a springboard for innovation in research.
By mapping what is known and exposing what is missing, they enable the creation of focused, relevant, and impactful research questions — ensuring that the next wave of studies builds on a solid foundation of existing evidence.