Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 60 views

    Scoping Review Methodology: 1. Identifying The Research Question

    Uploaded by

    Anjang Salamat
    The document outlines the scoping review methodology used to systematically map the existing literature on online open innovation communities (OOICs). It describes conducting a scoping review to identify key topics, principles ("lessons learned"), and determine if OOICs are a promising approach for healthcare. The methodology follows a 6-stage process: 1) identifying research questions, 2) identifying relevant studies, 3) selecting studies, 4) charting data, 5) collating and summarizing results, and 6) consulting knowledge users. The research questions aim to map contexts and structures of OOICs, reasons for user contributions, challenges, management, idea selection and measures of success.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Scoping Review Methodology: 1. Identifying The Research Question

    Uploaded by

    Anjang Salamat
    60 views3 pages
    The document outlines the scoping review methodology used to systematically map the existing literature on online open innovation communities (OOICs). It describes conducting a scoping review to identify key topics, principles ("lessons learned"), and determine if OOICs are a promising approach for healthcare. The methodology follows a 6-stage process: 1) identifying research questions, 2) identifying relevant studies, 3) selecting studies, 4) charting data, 5) collating and summarizing results, and 6) consulting knowledge users. The research questions aim to map contexts and structures of OOICs, reasons for user contributions, challenges, management, idea selection and measures of success.

    Original Description:

    Filipino 12

    Original Title

    pone.0156175.s002

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document outlines the scoping review methodology used to systematically map the existing literature on online open innovation communities (OOICs). It describes conducting a scoping review to identify key topics, principles ("lessons learned"), and determine if OOICs are a promising approach for healthcare. The methodology follows a 6-stage process: 1) identifying research questions, 2) identifying relevant studies, 3) selecting studies, 4) charting data, 5) collating and summarizing results, and 6) consulting knowledge users. The research questions aim to map contexts and structures of OOICs, reasons for user contributions, challenges, management, idea selection and measures of success.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    60 views3 pages

    Scoping Review Methodology: 1. Identifying The Research Question

    Uploaded by

    Anjang Salamat
    The document outlines the scoping review methodology used to systematically map the existing literature on online open innovation communities (OOICs). It describes conducting a scoping review to identify key topics, principles ("lessons learned"), and determine if OOICs are a promising approach for healthcare. The methodology follows a 6-stage process: 1) identifying research questions, 2) identifying relevant studies, 3) selecting studies, 4) charting data, 5) collating and summarizing results, and 6) consulting knowledge users. The research questions aim to map contexts and structures of OOICs, reasons for user contributions, challenges, management, idea selection and measures of success.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    Scoping review methodology

    Despite their similarities, the scoping review methodology distinguishes itself from the
    traditional systematic review approach in terms of its nature and purpose as outlined by Brien and
    colleagues [1] (see Table 1). The scoping review allows the researcher to map the existing literature
    on a certain topic in a systematic and comprehensive way. The findings of the scoping review may
    then in turn provide the ideal basis for a systematic literature review.
    Given the interdisciplinary nature and purpose of this study, we chose to follow the five-
    stage framework of the scoping review methodology as proposed by Arksey and O’Malley [2]. Aiming
    to link the available evidence from various disciplines to the healthcare context our research
    question was broad in nature, which in turn required post hoc adjustments of the initial inclusion and
    exclusion criteria. Further, as we were aiming to map the field study quality was not prioritized.

    Table 1. Comparison of the characteristics of scoping and systematic reviews [1].

    Systematic Review Scoping Review


    Focused research question with narrow
    Research question(s) often broad
    parameters
    Inclusion/exclusion usually defined at outset Inclusion/exclusion can be developed post hoc
    Quality filters often applied Quality not an initial priority
    Detailed data extraction May or may not involve data extraction
    Synthesis more qualitative, and typically not
    Quantitative synthesis often performed
    quantitative
    Formally assesses the quality of studies and
    Used to identify parameters and gaps in a body
    generates a conclusion relating to the focused
    of literature
    research question

    Research Protocol
    following Arksey and O’Malley [2]. The research questions were developed and refined in a
    collaborative effort of the research team (JA, CZ, SR).

    1. Identifying the Research Question


    The specific questions guiding this scoping review were:
    (1) In which contexts are online open innovation communities (OOICs) used and how are they
    initiated? (firm vs user initiated)
    (2) How are OOICs organized and structured?
    (3) Why do users contribute to OOICs?
    (4) What are the challenges when involving OOICs in the innovation process?
    (5) What do we know about managing OOICs?
    (6) How are ideas generated by OOICs being selected?
    (7) Are OOICs a successful idea acquisition mechanism?
    (8) What are the measures of success for OOICs?

    Thus, the purposes of this scoping review will be to


    1. Map the literature on OOICs in order to identify topics of interest relevant for the
    healthcare setting
    2. Identify the key principles (“lessons learned”) of OOICs
    3. Determine whether OOICs constitute a promising approach for healthcare by taking the
    particularities of the setting into account

    1
    2. Study Identification
    The search strategy was developed by the research team (JA, CZ, SR). In an effort to balance
    feasibility with comprehensiveness of the scoping process, we decided to focus on scientific articles
    published in English. Publications in other languages as well as grey literature were important
    sources that informed data extraction and analysis.
    It should also be noted that while theoretical and conceptual work served as a foundation
    and important guidance to the research process and interpretation of the findings, only empirical
    studies are reported in the findings of the scoping review.
    Due to the heterogeneity of the field in terms of disciplines and terminology, our search
    strategy might have failed to capture some relevant studies. We tried to minimize this risk by
    conducting a preliminary review of the literature to inform both our search strategy as well as study
    selection criteria.

    Keywords:
    “open innovation” OR “idea challenge” OR “crowd sourcing” OR “crowd-sourcing” OR
    (innovation AND “internet user”) OR (innovation AND (“social media” OR facebook OR
    twitter)) OR “user co-creation” OR “open innovation community” or “internet community”
    OR “web-based community” OR “online community” OR “online innovation community”
    1995-2014, English

    Databases searched to import citation and abstract into EndNote


     ISI Web of Science
     Communication & Mass Media Complete
     psycINFO
     Business Source Premier
     MEDLINE
     ABI Inform Global
     ABI Trade & Industry

    After elimination of incomplete files and duplicates, the remaining files were converted to RIS
    format and were imported into EPPI reviewer 4, a web-based software tool for research synthesis.

    3. Study selection
    The research team (JA, CZ, SR) engaged in an iterative process to refine the inclusion and exclusion
    criteria. Inter-coder reliability was assessed for 20% of the records and yielded 90% correspondence.

    Final inclusion criteria:


    - 1995-2014, English, empirical study
    - Focus: autonomous or firm-sponsored/hosted online community with end-user (consumer)
    activities focused on co-creation/innovation (e.g. product improvement)

    Studies were excluded if they examined online communities that did not involve user innovation
    activities (e.g. dating communities) or that did not focus on end-user (consumer involvement) but
    rather employee or supplier integration. Studies reporting on offline initiatives to integrate
    consumers in the innovation process, studies investigating innovation intermediaries or
    crowdfunding practices were also excluded.
    2
    4. Charting the Data
    Two researchers (JA, CZ) developed and refined the data charting form (Table 2). Data extraction was
    performed by JA.

    Articles Characteristics Study Characteristics Study Findings


    Title Field of Research Results
    Year of publication Research Focus Conclusion
    Author(s) Study Design
    Journal Methods
    Research Questions
    Hypothesis

    5. Collating, Summarizing, and Reporting Results


    o Mapping and categorization of areas of research (study focus / research questions)
    o Narrative account of the evidence
    o Identification of “lessons learned” (best practice approaches)

    6. Consulting Knowledge Users


    Due to resource constraints, the optional consultation with knowledge users was not conducted. This
    is however planned for a forthcoming project to be initiated in 2016.

    References

    1. Brien SE, Lorenzetti DL, Lewis S, Kennedy J, Ghali WA (2010) Overview of a formal scoping review
    on health system report cards. Implement Sci 5: 2.
    2. Arksey H, O'Malley L (2005) Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International
    journal of social research methodology 8: 19-32.

    You might also like