A practice-based methodology on conducting a collaborative scoping review with PRISMA-ScR model for the separated refugee youth project
MetadataShow full item record
Considering the novelty of the area of a 2-year study on impact of family loss and separation on refugee youth in Toronto, the research team decided to conduct a scoping review of the existing literature as a foundation document that included the extent, range, geography, and nature of research on the topic of interest. A collaborative co-design approach for this review bought in wisdom from relevant stakeholders. Arksey and O’Malley’s framework was modified for this scoping review that substantively identified the extent and magnitude of past research, research gaps, and best practice models for conducting such exploratory research on novel ideas. This framework yielded desired output, such as selection and characteristics of sources of evidence, critical appraisal within sources of evidence, and synthesis of results for the next steps of the research. Prudent researchers and professionals in this area of research, service provider agencies, and a university librarian were consulted. The PRISMA-ScR model saved time and ensured the appropriate yield of the search items. The quality of the review process was evaluated by the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Qualitative Studies Checklist tool. This article displays a practical example of how the scoping review process was instrumental in a community-based research project with separated refugee youth to generate the foundational evidence for broader research. This quality-embedded process of collecting and charting data for a scoping review is transferable to similar research initiatives. The flexibility and reproducibility of this review method is commendable.
Alamgir, A. K. M., Nudel, S., & Abojedi, A. (2022). A Practice-based Methodology on Conducting a Collaborative Scoping Review with PRISMA-ScR Model for the Separated Refugee Youth Project. Journal of Scientific Research and Reports, 28(2), 23-33. https://doi.org/10.9734/jsrr/2022/v28i230498