Which review type does not assess the quality of the studies included?

The scoping review is designed primarily to explore the breadth and depth of literature on a particular topic without necessarily evaluating the quality of the studies included. Instead, its focus is on identifying key concepts, theories, evidence, and gaps in research to inform future research directions or policy decisions. Scoping reviews are useful for mapping out existing knowledge and can help to clarify the scope of a topic.

In contrast, systematic reviews undertake a comprehensive search for evidence and systematically evaluate the quality of the studies included to summarize the findings based on methodological rigor. Meta-analyses, which are often part of systematic reviews, quantitatively synthesize data from various studies, while narrative reviews summarize existing literature without a specific systematic approach but still tend to address quality in a less structured way. Understanding the differences between these types of reviews can help ensure appropriate methodologies are applied in research contexts.