UWA staff and students may be interested in registering for this session, run by Covidence.
Tuesday 11 November
12:30pm AWST
Register Here
Scoping reviews are powerful tools to explore broad or emerging topics, map existing evidence, and identify gaps in the literature. But how are they different from systematic reviews, and when should you choose one over the other?
This webinar is designed for experienced researchers who want to confidently plan, conduct, or support scoping reviews. We’ll walk through key steps, common challenges, and practical tips to help you get started or refine your current approach.
By the end of this webinar, you will:
This webinar is being led by Dr. Danielle Pollock, University of Adelaide. Dr Danielle Pollock is a nationally and internationally recognised evidence synthesis methodologist. She is a Senior Research Fellow and senior member of the Health Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations, and Impact (HESRI) research group, with extensive experience in evidence synthesis methodology, guideline development, and interest holder engagement.
A systematic review is a type of research paper, mostly commonly written in medical subject areas. Instead of gathering new data, a systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive, unbiased synthesis of many relevant studies into a single document using rigorous and transparent methods. A systematic review aims to locate, combine and summarize all existing knowledge on a particular question in order to inform policy and practice.
The two most important features of systematic reviews are that the authors aim to locate "all" of the existing evidence, and that the methods for locating and reporting that evidence avoid bias.
You might undertake a systematic review when:
Except for logos, Canva designs, AI generated images or where otherwise indicated, content in this guide is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence.