Yahoo Canada Web Search

Search results

  1. Evidence-based research is the use of prior research in a systematic and transparent way to inform a new study so that it is answering questions that matter in a valid, efficient, and accessible manner. Results: We describe evidence-based research and provide an overview of the approach of systematically and transparently using previous ...

  2. The aim of this paper is to systematically identify and evaluate horizon scanning methodologies employed in the healthcare and biomedical fields. Methods A systematic literature review was performed using PubMed and Embase and was supplemented with grey literature searches (2008–2018). The principal methodologies used in horizon scanning were ...

    • Philip Hines, Li Hiu Yu, Richard H Guy, Angela Brand, Marisa Papaluca-Amati
    • 2019
  3. Consider the author's purpose & source type: Before reading a text closely, develop a sense of the source's audience and why it was created. Be critical of the material and maximize your understanding of the source's structure. Scan Titles & Headings: Determine if the source may contain useful information. Scan the Abstract & Introduction

    • What Is A Scoping Review and How Is It Different from Other Evidence Syntheses?
    • Guidance to Improve The Quality of Reporting of Scoping Reviews
    • Reasons For Conducting A Scoping Review
    • Future Directions in Scoping Reviews

    A scoping review is a type of evidence synthesis that has the objective of identifying and mapping relevant evidence that meets pre-determined inclusion criteria regarding the topic, field, context, concept or issue under review. The review question guiding a scoping review is typically broader than that of a traditional systematic review. Scoping ...

    Since the first 2005 framework for scoping reviews (then termed ‘scoping studies’) , the popularity of this approach has grown, with numbers doubling between 2014 and 2017 . The PRISMA-ScR is the most up-to-date and advanced approach for reporting scoping reviews which is largely based on the popular PRISMA statement and checklist, the JBI methodol...

    Whilst systematic reviews sit at the top of the evidence hierarchy, the types of research questions they address are not suitable for every application . Many indications more appropriately require a scoping review. For example, to explore the extent and nature of a body of literature, the development of evidence maps and summaries; to inform futur...

    The field of evidence synthesis is dynamic. Scoping review methodology continues to evolve to account for the changing needs and priorities of end users and the requirements of review authors for additional guidance regarding terminology, elements and steps of scoping reviews. Areas where ongoing research and development of scoping review guidance ...

    • Micah D. J. Peters, Micah D. J. Peters, Casey Marnie, Heather Colquhoun, Chantelle M. Garritty, Susa...
    • 2021
  4. Jan 14, 2020 · Pathway 6, “identifying futures research and evidence priorities,” begins with horizon scanning but feeds the results into 7 Questions, issues papers, driver mapping, and then roadmapping. Pathway 7, “identifying and prioritizing future opportunities and threats for action,” also starts with horizon scanning but feeds the results into driver mapping and SWOT analysis.

    • Division on Earth, Forum on Cyber Resilience, Board on Agriculture
    • 2020/01/14
    • 2020
  5. Scanning is basically skimming with a more tightly focused purpose: skimming to locate a particular fact or figure, or to see whether this text mentions a subject you’re researching. Scanning is essential in the writing of research papers, when you may need to look through many articles and books in order to find the material you need.

  6. People also ask

  7. Apr 18, 2020 · There are a range of other useful frameworks that can be used for translating scanning outputs including roadmapping the steps towards acting on different horizon-scanning issues, for example, by assessing the feasibility and estimating how long it would take to develop technologies needed to address particular research gaps (Box 3.2; Kennicutt et al., Reference Kennicutt, Chown and Cassano 2015).