  Background: In view of the growth of published papers, there is an increasing
need for studies that summarise scientific research. An increasingly common
review is a 'Methodology scoping review', which provides a summary of existing
analytical methods, techniques and software, proposed or applied in research
articles, which address an analytical problem or further an analytical
approach. However, guidelines for their design, implementation and reporting
are limited.
  Methods: Drawing on the experiences of the authors, which were consolidated
through a series of face-to-face workshops, we summarise the challenges
inherent in conducting a methodology scoping review and offer suggestions of
best practice to promote future guideline development.
  Results: We identified three challenges of conducting a methodology scoping
review. First, identification of search terms; one cannot usually define the
search terms a priori and the language used for a particular method can vary
across the literature. Second, the scope of the review requires careful
consideration since new methodology is often not described (in full) within
abstracts. Third, many new methods are motivated by a specific clinical
question, where the methodology may only be documented in supplementary
materials. We formulated several recommendations that build upon existing
review guidelines. These recommendations ranged from an iterative approach to
defining search terms through to screening and data extraction processes.
  Conclusion: Although methodology scoping reviews are an important aspect of
research, there is currently a lack of guidelines to standardise their design,
implementation and reporting. We recommend a wider discussion on this topic.
