This case discusses how scoping review methodology was used to map the literature in an emergent area of research, ‘structural change public health interventions. The discussion is focused on differences between scoping reviews and systematic reviews, as well as advantages and disadvantages of scoping reviews, compared to other literature review methods.
1: Why is a scoping review an iterative and not a linear process?
2: Why are scoping reviews best employed when there is limited literature to inform the research question of interest?
Taking up a critical perspective, this case study seeks to contribute an account of methodological and theoretical aspects underlying the process of literature examination. The main purpose is to reflect on constituents of the procedures surrounding the topic, by providing a brief case exemplification.
1: Why is it important to set clear aims and objectives of the review?
2: What are the shortcomings of literature reviews?
This case study describes a systematic review originally undertaken for a master’s dissertation in health economics and health policy. The steps involved in conducting the systematic review are detailed, and the qualitative discourse analysis and quantitative graphical and statistical analyses in the review are described. The case study provides an insight into the processes that are standard in any systematic review and encouragement to try novel techniques.
1: Why is it important to formulate clear inclusion criteria in a literature review?
2: How is the relevance of the literature determined in literature reviews?