DOI: 10.17605/osf.io/7dqxg
title: NURSING DIAGNOSES IN NEONATES WITH CONGENITAL MALFORMATIONS: SCOPE REVIEW

description: This study will be a scoping review, therefore, submission to the Research Ethics Committee will be waived; however, the reliability and fidelity of the information contained in the selected publications will be guaranteed.

Type of Study
This study will follow the method proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist (TRICCO et al., 2018). To summarize the review, the research question will be developed, sampling, study categorization, evaluation of the studies included in the scoping review, interpretation of the results, and synthesis of the results.

Methodological Procedures
The guiding question will be: "Which NDs are used in the care of newborns born with CAs?" The defined PCC mnemonic was: P (Congenital Abnormalities); C (Nursing and Neonatal Diagnoses); C (evidence in the hospital setting).
Prior to this review, a preliminary search was conducted in the MEDLINE databases via PubMed, EMBASE via the Capes Portal, and COCHRANE to identify possible study protocols on the topic, but none were found.
Regarding the selection criteria, studies that addressed the research objective and the review question, without time, language, or geographic restrictions, were included. Studies published in full, free versions were eligible. All newborns born between 22 weeks of gestational age and 28 days of life will be considered neonates.
All sources of evidence will be included: primary research, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, letters, guidelines, and others. Studies unavailable in full or incomplete form will be excluded from the sample, as well as those that addressed concepts other than the focus of this review, i.e., non-nursing diagnoses applied to neonates hospitalized with CAs. Research conducted with other populations—such as animals, adults, and children with congenital malformations—or in contexts other than the hospital environment will also be excluded.
Data collection will be conducted by two independent reviewers. Database searches will be conducted through registration on the journal portal of the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) via the Federated Academic Community (CAFe). The databases and search strategy will be defined with the assistance of a research librarian, whose invaluable contribution was essential in the design and refinement of the search.
The review sample will be selected from seven databases: Medline/Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, Sciencedirect, LILACS, and a gray literature source: Google Scholar.

Data Analysis
The results obtained from all search platforms will be exported to Rayyan® to exclude duplicate studies. Duplicate documents will be considered only once. The studies will undergo pre-selection based on a reading of the titles and abstracts to verify their consistency with the listed eligibility criteria. After this stage, they will be fully evaluated. Data collection and analysis will be conducted by two independent reviewers, and in the event of a lack of consensus, a third reviewer will be consulted.
The final stages of extraction, information delimitation, and evidence analysis will be performed through descriptive analysis to characterize the studies. This step will be performed after analyzing the PRISMA-ScR flowchart, mapping the data extracted from the articles, which will be included in a tabular instrument created in Microsoft Word®.
The instrument will consist of the publication's characterization (title, author, year of publication, country, type of study, objective, population). Therefore, the findings will be described and discussed critically and reflectively, aligning them with publications related to the study topic. The results will be organized, presented in Tables and discussed with support from the literature.

References
[1] Aromataris E, Munn Z. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Adelaide: JBI; 2020. https://doi.org/10.46658/ JBIMES-20-01
[2] Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac, D, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med 2018;169(7):467-73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850