Ensuring research continuity during crises: A scoping review
7 affiliations
- 1Clinical Research Institute, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
- 2Faculty of Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
- 3Office of Research, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
- 4Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.
- 5Harvard University, Boston, United States of America.
- 6Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
- 7Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
Background: During crises, both challenging circumstances and uncertainty threaten the continuity of research operations. Research projects, research institutions and funders need to implement strategies to ensure research continuity. Objective: To scope the literature on challenges to research continuity and strategies for ensuring research continuity during crises. Methods: We followed standard scoping review methodology and reported findings in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. We included quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods primary studies on our topic across all research disciplines and types of crises. We searched MEDLINE (OVID) and Scopus databases (January 2000 to January 2026). We abstracted data on study characteristics, challenges, mitigation strategies, and the role of funders. We summarized categorical data descriptively and analyzed qualitative data thematically presenting our findings in narrative and tabular formats. Results: Out of 22,002 captured citations, we identified 112 eligible studies. Most studies focused on pandemic-related crises (91%), mostly related to clinical research (47%) and social sciences (46%), and were conducted predominantly in high-income countries (80%). Challenges occurred at the project (81%), institutional (27%), and funder (15%) levels. The most common challenges for these levels were respectively project suspensions (58%), lack of institutional support (14%), and poor or no research funding (12%). Key mitigation strategies were flexible research operations (80%), adjustments to institutional policies and governance (25%), and implementing strategic interventions (31%). Funders contributed to research continuity, primarily through financial flexibility (56%) and supporting adaptations (39%). Conclusion: This scoping review maps the key challenges, strategies, and funder roles in sustaining research during crises. Findings highlight the need for flexible, resilient, and well-coordinated research systems across multiple levels. Future research should evaluate the long-term effectiveness of these strategies.
Related
- Ensuring proportionality: a logical model for compensatory seats added to multi-member constituencies
- Contribution of artificial intelligence research to the development of inclusive applications for people with disabilities: A scoping review (2015–2025)
- Shared crises, unequal paths: European Covid-19 trajectories
- Ensuring the Safety and Faultlessness Database in Smart-Systems at Analyzing of Technical and Economic Indicators of Power Installations
- Notes on Uniform Policy Score Bounds and Lipschitz Continuity for Truncated Gaussian, Product Cauchy, Boltzmann, and Softmax Policies
BibTeX
@article{zeidan2026ensuring,
title = {{Ensuring research continuity during crises: A scoping review}},
author = {Lili Zeidan and Sarah Kamareddine and Macy Zaatar and Mohamad Sadek Zoghbi and Shahinda Hammoud and Hebatalla Shamseldin and Ola El Zein and Makram Halawani and May Awar Ammar and Elie A Akl},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0353082},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0353082},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Ensuring research continuity during crises: A scoping review
AU - Lili Zeidan
AU - Sarah Kamareddine
AU - Macy Zaatar
AU - Mohamad Sadek Zoghbi
AU - Shahinda Hammoud
AU - Hebatalla Shamseldin
AU - Ola El Zein
AU - Makram Halawani
AU - May Awar Ammar
AU - Elie A Akl
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/02
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0353082
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0353082
AB - Background: During crises, both challenging circumstances and uncertainty threaten the continuity of research operations. Research projects, research institutions and funders need to implement strategies to ensure research continuity. Objective: To scope the literature on challenges to research continuity and strategies for ensuring research continuity during crises. Methods: We followed standard scoping review methodology and reported findings in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. We included quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods primary studies on our topic across all research disciplines and types of crises. We searched MEDLINE (OVID) and Scopus databases (January 2000 to January 2026). We abstracted data on study characteristics, challenges, mitigation strategies, and the role of funders. We summarized categorical data descriptively and analyzed qualitative data thematically presenting our findings in narrative and tabular formats. Results: Out of 22,002 captured citations, we identified 112 eligible studies. Most studies focused on pandemic-related crises (91%), mostly related to clinical research (47%) and social sciences (46%), and were conducted predominantly in high-income countries (80%). Challenges occurred at the project (81%), institutional (27%), and funder (15%) levels. The most common challenges for these levels were respectively project suspensions (58%), lack of institutional support (14%), and poor or no research funding (12%). Key mitigation strategies were flexible research operations (80%), adjustments to institutional policies and governance (25%), and implementing strategic interventions (31%). Funders contributed to research continuity, primarily through financial flexibility (56%) and supporting adaptations (39%). Conclusion: This scoping review maps the key challenges, strategies, and funder roles in sustaining research during crises. Findings highlight the need for flexible, resilient, and well-coordinated research systems across multiple levels. Future research should evaluate the long-term effectiveness of these strategies.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -