Description:

This Master Prompt would focus on establishing the methodological and conceptual foundation of a scoping review before evidence identification begins. It would guide researchers in defining the review problem, explaining why a scoping review is appropriate, determining the purpose and scope of evidence mapping, formulating objectives and research questions, and establishing the boundaries of the review. Researchers would distinguish scoping reviews from systematic reviews, narrative reviews, critical reviews, rapid reviews, mapping reviews, and other evidence-synthesis approaches.

A major emphasis would be placed on ensuring alignment between the review rationale, objectives, research questions, intended evidence map, and expected contribution. Researchers would determine whether the review seeks to map evidence characteristics, clarify concepts or definitions, examine how research has been conducted, identify types of available evidence, investigate knowledge gaps, explore emerging fields, or provide foundational evidence for a subsequent systematic review. This reflects the uploaded literature, where scoping reviews perform functions ranging from concept clarification and evidence-volume assessment to gap identification and preparation for subsequent systematic reviews.