Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
September 5, 2025HRB Open ResearchOpen Access

Exploring Discrepancies between Protocols and Published Scoping Reviews in Implementation Science: Protocol for a Methodological Study

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

AOAoife O’MahonyCHClair HaseldineBABianca Albers

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

This methodological study explores discrepancies between published scoping reviews and their protocols, highlighting issues in implementation science.

Key Points

  • Discrepancies between protocols and published scoping reviews are common and may undermine scientific validity.
  • The study assesses discrepancies in scoping reviews from five major journals, examining the extent and reasons behind them.
  • Methodological details from scoping reviews and their protocols will be extracted and coded to identify discrepancies.
  • Findings aim to improve guidance for conducting and reporting scoping reviews in the field of implementation science.

Cite This Study

O’Mahony et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68bb3ef02b87ece8dc9576a4https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.14158.1
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Exploring Discrepancies between Protocols and Published Scoping Reviews in Implementation Science: Protocol for a Methodological Study2025
  2. 2Contemporary practices in scoping review protocol registration: a meta-research analysis of high-impact health journals (2024–2025)2026
  3. 3Scoping review and evidence mapping of interventions aimed at improving reproducible and replicable science: Protocol2024 · 1 citations
  4. 4Meta-research on key metrics of preregistered scoping reviews2026
  5. 5A scoping review of scoping reviews in healthcare simulation: a research protocol2025