
Background:Scenario-based research is widely used across multiple disciplines to study decision-making, coordination, and complex systems. However, inconsistent terminology and insufficient descriptions of scenarios in reports reduce interpretability, hinder replication, and negatively affect inter-organizational collaboration and policymaking. Objective:The aim of this study was to develop a glossary that improves how scenarios are described in scientific and organizational reports. The target group consisted of professional scenarists, researchers, and practitioners from multiple domains, including healthcare, emergency services, security, and simulation-based training, who design, analyze, or use scenarios in their work. Results:Through interviews with nine participants from diverse professional fields, the study identified 46 terms organized into nine categories, including scenario types, components, roles, evaluation, and logistics. The resulting glossary captures both qualitative and quantitative dimensions of scenario design and reporting and reflects a broad shared understanding across organizations, while also highlighting variations in terminology use. Conclusion:The developed glossary provides a structured framework for improving the clarity and completeness of scenario descriptions. It has potential applications as a checklist for reporting and as a tool for enhancing communication and shared understanding between organizations. Further validation is needed to ensure its applicability across additional domains.
(MeSH) Communication, (MeSH) Interviews as Topic, (MeSH) Decision Making, (MeSH) Emergency Preparedness, (MeSH) Simulation Training
(MeSH) Communication, (MeSH) Interviews as Topic, (MeSH) Decision Making, (MeSH) Emergency Preparedness, (MeSH) Simulation Training
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
