Scoping review

A Scoping review is a systematic methodology, first proposed by Arksey and O'Malley in 2005 and further developed by institutions like the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). Its core purpose is to broadly explore existing knowledge within a specific research area, identifying key concepts, main evidence sources, and research gaps, essentially mapping the knowledge landscape. Unlike a systematic review, which focuses on answering a narrow question with rigorous quality assessment, a Scoping review prioritizes breadth and depth of exploration. While not a regulation itself, its methodological rigor aligns with international research ethics and evidence synthesis standards. For instance, the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guideline provides detailed reporting items, ensuring transparency and reproducibility. In AI governance, standards like ISO/IEC 42001 (AI Management System) or the NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF) emphasize evidence-based decision-making. A Scoping review provides the necessary knowledge foundation for implementing these frameworks, such as identifying best practices for AI risk assessment, serving as a crucial tool in the risk identification and assessment phases.

Scoping reviews serve as a vital strategic tool in enterprise risk management. Implementation typically involves: first, **defining the research question and scope**, for example, exploring 'trustworthiness and compliance requirements for AI in biomedical decision-making'; second, **conducting a systematic literature search** across academic databases, regulatory sources, and industry reports based on predefined search strategies; third, **screening and extracting data**, filtering literature according to inclusion/exclusion criteria and extracting key information such as AI governance frameworks, risk assessment methodologies, and compliance challenges; finally, **synthesizing and reporting**, analyzing the extracted data to map the knowledge landscape, identify key concepts, research trends, and knowledge gaps, culminating in a comprehensive report. For instance, a Taiwanese FinTech company, before developing an AI-driven credit scoring system, could use a Scoping review to comprehensively map global AI financial regulations and ethical guidelines (e.g., EU AI Act, Taiwan's Personal Data Protection Act, FSC regulations), identifying potential compliance risks and best practices. Through this application, the company could increase potential compliance risk identification by 30% and reduce regulatory review time for new product development by 15%, ensuring early-stage compliance and mitigating post-launch fines.

Taiwanese enterprises face several challenges when implementing Scoping reviews. First, **resource constraints and lack of expertise**: many SMEs lack dedicated literature review specialists and sufficient human resources for this time-consuming and specialized task. Second, **difficulty in integrating cross-domain knowledge**: AI governance involves technology, law, and ethics, posing challenges for Taiwanese firms in synthesizing these diverse knowledge areas. Third, **dynamic regulations and international alignment**: the evolving landscape of Taiwanese regulations and international standards (e.g., GDPR, EU AI Act) makes it difficult for enterprises to continuously track and incorporate them into their Scoping reviews. To overcome these, enterprises can: **seek assistance from external professional consultants** like Winners Consulting, leveraging their experience and tools to expedite Scoping review execution and provide expert training; **establish cross-functional collaboration mechanisms**, forming teams from legal, R&D, and risk management departments to ensure multi-perspective analysis; and **adopt automation tools and knowledge management platforms**, utilizing AI-assisted literature search and analysis tools, and building internal KM platforms for timely and accurate updates on regulations and standards. Priority actions and timelines: Phase 1 (1-3 months) involves collaborating with consultants for initial key risk area Scoping reviews and establishing a basic internal knowledge base; Phase 2 (4-6 months) focuses on training internal core teams, implementing literature management tools, and establishing ongoing monitoring mechanisms; Phase 3 (7-12 months) integrates Scoping review findings into the enterprise risk management framework and decision-making processes, enabling knowledge-driven risk management.

Winners Consulting specializes in Scoping review for Taiwan enterprises, delivering compliant management systems within 90 days. Free consultation: https://winners.com.tw/contact