The background of a study is the opening section of a research paper or thesis that establishes what is already known about the topic, identifies what remains unknown, and explains why the current study is needed. It provides readers with enough context to understand the research problem without requiring them
A scoping review and a systematic review are both forms of evidence synthesis that follow structured, transparent methodologies, but they serve fundamentally different purposes. A scoping review maps the breadth and nature of available evidence on a broad topic, while a systematic review synthesizes and appraises evidence to answer a
A scoping review is a type of evidence synthesis that maps the breadth and nature of research activity on a broad topic, rather than answering a narrow clinical question like a systematic review does. Researchers use scoping reviews to identify knowledge gaps, clarify key concepts, examine how research is conducted
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) is an evidence-based reporting guideline that helps researchers transparently document every phase of a systematic review. The PRISMA 2020 statement includes a 27-item checklist organized into seven sections and a four-phase flow diagram that tracks how records move from identification through
A literature review is a critical survey and synthesis of existing scholarly sources on a specific topic. Rather than simply summarizing individual studies, it evaluates, compares, and connects findings to identify patterns, debates, and gaps in the current knowledge. A literature review appears in theses, dissertations, journal articles, and research