The Contribution of Scoping Reviews to Healthcare Policy and Research Direction

Introduction

In the evolving landscape of healthcare, effective policies and well-prioritized research agendas depend on a thorough understanding of existing evidence. While systematic reviews and meta-analyses are often used for focused clinical questions, scoping reviews offer a broader approach. They map the extent, range, and nature of available research on a topic without restricting inclusion to specific study designs or outcomes.

Scoping reviews are particularly valuable for shaping healthcare policy and future research directions because they identify gaps in knowledge, clarify concepts, and provide a comprehensive overview of evidence across diverse contexts.

Role of Scoping Reviews in Policy Development

1. Mapping Evidence for Decision-Makers

   • Scoping reviews summarize what is known about a topic, allowing policymakers to see the full landscape before drafting regulations or funding programs.

   • Example: A scoping review on community-based palliative care models might highlight effective service structures for rural populations.

2. Identifying Evidence Gaps

   • Policymakers can use this insight to direct funding toward underserved areas or populations.

   • Example: Discovering a lack of studies on maternal mental health in low-income countries could influence international aid priorities.

3. Supporting Early-Stage Policy Discussions

   • Before committing to a specific intervention, decision-makers can use scoping reviews to evaluate the breadth of evidence, ensuring policies are not based on incomplete or biased sources.

Influence on Research Direction

1. Guiding Research Priorities

   • Researchers can design studies that address gaps identified in scoping reviews, avoiding duplication and focusing on high-impact areas.

2. Informing Systematic Reviews

   • Scoping reviews often precede systematic reviews, helping refine research questions to be more specific and answerable.

3. Stimulating Innovation

   • By showcasing emerging trends, scoping reviews encourage exploration of novel approaches and technologies in healthcare.

Advantages for Policymakers and Researchers

• Breadth of Coverage — Includes a wide range of evidence sources, from peer-reviewed articles to grey literature.

• Flexibility — Can address complex, interdisciplinary topics that may not be suitable for systematic review methods.

• Accessibility — Often presented in a way that is easier for non-academic audiences to interpret.

Challenges in Policy and Research Use

• Lack of Critical Appraisal — Unlike systematic reviews, scoping reviews generally do not assess the quality of included studies, which may limit the strength of policy recommendations.

• Resource Intensity — Comprehensive mapping can require significant time and effort.

• Risk of Overinterpretation — Policymakers may mistakenly treat scoping review findings as definitive evidence of effectiveness.

Example of Impact

Case Study: Telehealth Expansion Policy
A scoping review of telehealth applications during the COVID-19 pandemic provided policymakers with a wide view of how different countries adapted virtual care. This informed legislative reforms that expanded telehealth reimbursement and infrastructure investment in multiple healthcare systems.

Conclusion

Scoping reviews make substantial contributions to healthcare policy and research by mapping existing evidence, identifying knowledge gaps, and highlighting emerging trends. They provide the foundation for targeted policies and well-prioritized research agendas, ensuring that resources are directed where they are most needed. While they do not replace the depth of systematic reviews or the precision of meta-analyses, their breadth and flexibility make them a vital tool for strategic decision-making in healthcare.