 Abstract scoping reviews, mapping reviews, and evidence gap maps are all forms of evidence synthesis that seek to answer broad research questions by summarizing existing literature on a given topic. These three approaches differ in their underlying theories, with abstract scoping reviews focusing on identifying gaps in knowledge, mapping reviews focusing on mapping out existing knowledge, and evidence gap maps focusing on identifying areas of knowledge that need further exploration. Despite these differences, they share some commonalities such as the use of systematic review methods and the goal of providing a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge. This article was authored by Fiona Campbell, Andrea C. Trico, Zachary Munn, and others.