Tools, techniques, methods, and processes for the detection and mitigation of fraudulent or erroneous data in evidence synthesis: a scoping review protocol

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15410%2F25%3A73635856" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15410/25:73635856 - isvavai.cz</a>

Result on the web

<a href="https://journals.lww.com/jbisrir/fulltext/2025/03000/tools,_techniques,_methods,_and_processes_for_the.9.aspx" target="_blank" >https://journals.lww.com/jbisrir/fulltext/2025/03000/tools,_techniques,_methods,_and_processes_for_the.9.aspx</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00167" target="_blank" >10.11124/JBIES-24-00167</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Tools, techniques, methods, and processes for the detection and mitigation of fraudulent or erroneous data in evidence synthesis: a scoping review protocol

Original language description

Objective:This scoping review aims to identify, catalogue, and characterize previously reported tools, techniques, methods, and processes that have been recommended or used by evidence synthesizers to detect fraudulent or erroneous data and mitigate its impact.Introduction:Decision-making for policy and practice should always be underpinned by the best available evidence-typically peer-reviewed scientific literature. Evidence synthesis literature should be collated and organized using the appropriate evidence synthesis methodology, best exemplified by the role systematic reviews play in evidence-based health care. However, with the rise of &quot;predatory journals,&quot; fraudulent or erroneous data may be invading this literature, which may negatively affect evidence syntheses that use this data. This, in turn, may compromise decision-making processes.Inclusion criteria:This review will include peer-reviewed articles, commentaries, books, and editorials that describe at least 1 tool, technique, method, or process with the explicit purpose of identifying or mitigating the impact of fraudulent or erroneous data for any evidence synthesis, in any topic area. Manuals, handbooks, and guidance from major organizations, universities, and libraries will also be considered.Methods:This review will be conducted using the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Databases and relevant organizational websites will be searched for eligible studies. Title and abstract, and, subsequently, full-text screening will be conducted in duplicate. Data from identified full texts will be extracted using a pre-determined checklist, while the findings will be summarized descriptively and presented in tables.Review registration:Open Science Framework https://osf.io/u8yrn

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

50302 - Education, special (to gifted persons, those with learning disabilities)

Project

—

Continuities

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Publication year

2025

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

JBI EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

ISSN

—

e-ISSN

2689-8381

Volume of the periodical

23

Issue of the periodical within the volume

3

Country of publishing house

AU - AUSTRALIA

Number of pages

10

Pages from-to

536-545

UT code for WoS article

001442610000002

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-85203659781