Evidence synthesis strategies and indications for scoping and systematic reviews: A methodological guide and recommendations for radiography research

Abstract

Objectives This review provides methodological guidance, including essential preparatory steps, for conducting systematic literature reviews (SLRs) to produce practical and evidence-based findings that influence the pillars of radiography practice. It also highlights the differences between a scoping review (ScR) and a SLR. Key findings SLRs differ from ScRs in their aims, scope, and methodological requirements. SLRs aim to answer specific research questions through comprehensive searches, critical appraisal, and synthesis of empirical studies, while ScRs map the extent of literature on a concept and are more flexible in methodological requirements. Essential components for both include formulation of precise research questions, protocol development, comprehensive literature search, screening and data extraction processes, and evidence synthesis. In addition, a high-quality SLR requires registration of the review protocol and specific qualitative synthesis approaches (e.g., meta-aggregation and meta-synthesis) and/or quantitative synthesis, such as meta-analysis. There are concerns about the lack of a radiography-specific database, necessitating the use of general databases (e.g., PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, etc) and discipline-specific sources (e.g., Radiography and related journals). There is also frequent heterogeneity of study designs in radiography research, which can limit the feasibility of meta-analysis in quantitative evidence synthesis. Conclusion Both SLRs and ScRs are essential for advancing evidence-based radiography practice. However, researchers need to adhere to established methodological standards to ensure transparency, reproducibility, and relevance of the findings. This will enhance research uptake in clinical practice, education, and policy and inform future research directions. Implications for practice Radiography researchers should select review types based on research objectives, apply rigorous and transparent methods, and consider multidisciplinary collaboration to strengthen evidence synthesis. Additionally, training in evidence synthesis methods will improve the rigour and relevance/impact of radiography review articles