Reviews of primary research studies are becoming increasingly important as the concept of evidence-based practice in healthcare is gaining more and more influence and the number of research projects is increasing enormously. One of the less well-known types of review is the “scoping review.” Scoping reviews are conducted when one first needs to take stock of the research literature. For example, scoping reviews are conducted in order to establish provisional working definitions or to define topics or subject areas conceptually. Preparing a scoping review also makes sense if the literature has not yet been comprehensively assessed or if it contains a complex or heterogeneous problem so that a more precise systematic review of the evidence is not appropriate. Scoping reviews can also serve to determine the scope and significance of a prospective classical systematic review. Finally, scoping reviews are also a good way to bundle and communicate research results, identify research gaps, and formulate recommendations for future research. This article explains the methodology of scoping reviews, their differences as compared to systematic reviews, and the reasons why they could be conducted. This guide to conducting scoping reviews is based on the methodology developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI).