DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.187182.1 ISSN: 2046-1402

Existing guidelines and training resources for creating Narrative CVs: a Scoping Review

Pushti Desai, AlMamoune Alaoui, Anna Catharina Vieira Armond, David Moher, Kelly Cobey
Show PDF Cite
Background Narrative CVs (NCVs) are increasingly being adopted as part of responsible research assessment initiatives that seek to recognize diverse scholarly contributions beyond traditional quantitative metrics. As funding agencies, institutions, and research organizations implement NCVs, effective training is needed to support both applicants and reviewers. This scoping review aimed to characterize publicly available training and guidance resources for NCVs. Methods We conducted a scoping review following the Arksey and O’Malley framework and reported findings according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, Web of Science, preprint servers, and extensive grey literature were conducted from 2010 to October 2025. English and French resources providing guidance on writing and/or evaluating NCVs were eligible. Data was extracted in duplicate and summarized using descriptive statistics. Results 65 training resources met the inclusion criteria. Most originated from Canada (38.46%) and the United Kingdom (24.62%) and were produced by universities (43.08%), funders (38.46%), or government organizations (26.15%). Common formats included resource websites (27.69%), webinars (23.08%), and commentary articles (13.85%). Most resources targeted applicants (83.08%), while only 23.08% targeted reviewers. Frequently covered topics were structuring NCV sections, explaining the purpose of NCVs, and presenting non-traditional research contributions. However, reviewer guidance (13.85%) and addressing bias in narrative assessment (15.38%) were infrequently covered. Although most resources were freely accessible (92.31%), only a few had accessibility features (9.24%). Practical tools to support NCV writing and assessment were also inconsistently provided and only 21.54% reported any evaluation of effectiveness. Conclusion Current NCV training resources reflect growing international adoption of responsible research assessment. However, they largely focus on applicants, and gaps remain in reviewer-focused guidance, accessibility, practical tools, and the evaluation of training effectiveness. Developing evidence-informed and rigorously evaluated training resources will support more equitable and effective implementation of narrative CVs.

More from our Archive