2026/04/01 by Tove Godskesen
Decision Sciences · Social Sciences · #Gender Diversity and Inequality #Psychometric Methodologies and Testing #Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
paper · doi:10.1002/leap.2057
openalex publication_date 2026/04/01 · openalex created_date 2026/04/02 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/02
Key Points Scoping reviews are exploratory by design and aim to map diverse evidence, not to evaluate or rank study quality. The QuADS tool, designed for empirical mixed‐methods studies, is conceptually misaligned with the epistemically inclusive aims of scoping reviews. Using numerical quality scores risks privileging empirical research and marginalising conceptual, normative, or policy‐based contributions. Transparency in scoping reviews can instead be achieved through reflexive, content‐sensitive reporting practices.