Methodological lineages of concept analysis and mapping of reporting elements in nursing and health-related disciplines: A scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION: Concept analysis is widely used in nursing and health-related disciplines to clarify ambiguous constructs, refine disciplinary language and support theory development, instrument construction, education and practice. However, concept analysis is methodologically plural rather than a single uniform method. Different approaches vary in their assumptions, data sources, analytic steps and expected outputs. AIMS: This scoping review will identify methodological lineages of concept analysis and map reporting elements across nursing and health-related disciplines. It will examine both the cross-lineage applicability and the empirical distribution of candidate reporting elements. METHODS: The review will follow Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for scoping reviews and will be reported according to the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews. Ten English- and Chinese-language databases will be searched from inception to the final search date, supplemented by targeted citation searching for foundational methodological sources. Two reviewers will independently screen records after calibration on a purposively enriched set of 25 records containing likely inclusions, likely exclusions and borderline records. Formal screening will begin after both overall raw agreement and positive agreement for the include/uncertain decision reach at least 75%; raw agreement and Cohen's kappa will be reported before consensus. Data will be charted using a piloted form and synthesised descriptively through deductive-inductive framework analysis. Reporting elements will be mapped by both methodological applicability and empirical distribution. CONCLUSION: The review will provide a structured account of concept analysis methods and reporting elements. It represents an evidence-mapping and candidate-item generation stage and will not itself produce a formal reporting guideline. The protocol is registered on the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/xru7f.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2026-10-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0361727
Primary Topic
Methodologies in Health Research and Practice
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Methodological lineages of concept analysis and mapping of reporting elements in nursing and health-related disciplines: A scoping review protocol

Jiejie Ge, Min You, Sijing Peng, Ting Zheng et al.
2 links
PLoS ONE
Methodologies in Health Research and Practice
article

Methodological lineages of concept analysis and mapping of reporting elements in nursing and health-related disciplines: A scoping review protocol

Jiejie Ge, Min You, Sijing Peng, Ting Zheng, Peili Xu, Xiang Wang, Min Wang
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Concept analysis is widely used in nursing and health-related disciplines to clarify ambiguous constructs, refine disciplinary language and support theory development, instrument construction, education and practice. However, concept analysis is methodologically plural rather than a single uniform method. Different approaches vary in their assumptions, data sources, analytic steps and expected outputs. AIMS: This scoping review will identify methodological lineages of concept analysis and map reporting elements across nursing and health-related disciplines. It will examine both the cross-lineage applicability and the empirical distribution of candidate reporting elements. METHODS: The review will follow Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for scoping reviews and will be reported according to the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews. Ten English- and Chinese-language databases will be searched from inception to the final search date, supplemented by targeted citation searching for foundational methodological sources. Two reviewers will independently screen records after calibration on a purposively enriched set of 25 records containing likely inclusions, likely exclusions and borderline records. Formal screening will begin after both overall raw agreement and positive agreement for the include/uncertain decision reach at least 75%; raw agreement and Cohen's kappa will be reported before consensus. Data will be charted using a piloted form and synthesised descriptively through deductive-inductive framework analysis. Reporting elements will be mapped by both methodological applicability and empirical distribution. CONCLUSION: The review will provide a structured account of concept analysis methods and reporting elements. It represents an evidence-mapping and candidate-item generation stage and will not itself produce a formal reporting guideline. The protocol is registered on the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/xru7f.

PLoS ONEVol. 21(10)
Anhui University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (CN), Hefei First People's Hospital (CN)
Anhui Provincial Department of Education, Anhui Provincial Quality Engineering Project, University Natural Science Research Project of Anhui Province
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Methodologies in Health Research and Practice
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon