Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 2022, 38(3).
137
Appendices
Appendix A
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews
(PRISMA-ScR) Checklist
(Tricco et al. (2018, pp. 467–473)
Section
Item
PRISMA-ScR
checklist item
Reported on
page #
Title
Title
1
Identify the report as a systematic review.
Page 1
Abstract
Structured summary
2
Provide a structured summary that includes (as
applicable): background, objectives, eligibility criteria,
sources of evidence, charting methods, results and
conclusions that relate to
the review questions and
objectives.
N/A
Introduction
Rationale
3
Describe the rationale for the review in the context of
what is already known. Explain why the review
questions/objectives lend themselves to a scoping review
approach.
Page 2–3
Objectives
4
Provide an explicit statement of the questions and
objectives being addressed with reference to their key
elements (e.g., population or participants, concepts and
context) or other relevant key elements used to
conceptualise the review questions and/or objectives.
Page 3
Methods
Protocol and
registration
5
Indicate whether a review protocol exists;
state if and
where it can be accessed (e.g., a Web address); and if
available, provide registration information, including the
registration number.
Not applicable
Eligibility criteria
6
Specify characteristics of the sources of evidence used as
eligibility criteria (e.g., years considered, language and
publication status), and provide a rationale.
4
Information sources
7
Describe all information sources in the search (e.g.,
databases with dates of coverage and contact with
authors to identify additional sources),
as well as the date
the most recent search was executed.
3
Search
8
Present the full electronic search strategy for at least 1
database, including any limits used, such that it could be
repeated.
Page 4
Selection of sources of
evidence
9
State the process for selecting sources of evidence (i.e.,
screening and eligibility) included in the review.
Pages 3–4
Data charting process
10
Describe the methods of charting data from the included
sources of evidence (e.g., calibrated forms or forms that
have been tested by the team before their use, and
whether data charting was done independently or in
duplicate) and any
processes for obtaining and
confirming data from investigators.
4–5
Data items
11
List and define all variables for which data were sought
and any assumptions and simplifications made.
Pages 8–9, 12
Critical appraisal of
individual sources of
evidence
12
If done, provide a rationale for conducting a critical
appraisal of included sources of evidence; describe the
methods used and how this information was used in any
data synthesis (if appropriate).
Page 6
Synthesis
of results
13
Describe the methods of handling and summarising the
data that were charted.
Page 6
Results
Selection of sources of
evidence
14
Give numbers of sources of evidence screened, assessed
for eligibility and included in the review, with reasons
for exclusions at each stage, ideally using a flow
diagram.
Page 5–6
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 2022, 38(3).
138
Section
Item
PRISMA-ScR checklist item
Reported on
page #
Characteristics of
sources of evidence
15
For each source of evidence, present characteristics for
which data were charted and provide the citations.
6–7
Critical appraisal
within sources of
evidence
16
If done, present data on critical appraisal of included
sources of evidence (see item 12).
Page 11
Results of individual
sources of evidence
17
For each
included source of evidence, present the
relevant data that were charted that relate to the review
questions and objectives.
Pages 8–11
Synthesis of results
18
Summarise and/or present the charting results as they
relate to the review questions and objectives.
Pages 5–11
Discussion
Summary of evidence
19
Summarise the main results (including an overview of
concepts, themes and types of evidence available), link to
the review questions and objectives and consider the
relevance to key groups.
Pages 12–13
Limitations
20
Discuss the limitations of the scoping review process.
Page 14
Conclusions
21
Provide a general interpretation
of the results with
respect to the review questions and objectives, as well as
potential implications and/or next steps.
Page 14
Funding
Funding
22
Describe sources of funding for the included sources of
evidence, as well as sources of funding for the scoping
review. Describe the role of the funders of the scoping
review.
Page 15
Note
. JBI = Joanna Briggs Institute; PRISMA-ScR = Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-
Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.
Dostları ilə paylaş: