This subject was discussed at last years IFATCA conference in committee B. There was a paper presented which resulted in the topic being kicked to the TOC (working group) for further examination.
The purpose of further examination was to then present another paper at next years conference with a view to liaising with ICAO about 'standardising' or making recommendations about what to do in this circumstance.
There were issues with being visual for the approach portion, but possibly not visual during a missed approach or shortly afterwards, joining circuits, following an IMAP (which one?), radio failure etc.
Various scenarios were presented which worked for a particular airport and airspace design but certainly would not work in other environments.
Additionally there probably would be different procedures developed for VFR airports (with occasional IFR ops) vs IFR airports (with occasional VFR ops).
Unfortunately following a single IFR MAP, depending on which one you were given (or is nominated), is only half the story; there are many airports where you get a star with a visual termination, thus never issued with an IFR approach expectation etc. Confusion also abounds about which IFR MAP to choose (if to follow one of those), GLS/MLS/RNAV/RNP/ILS/VOR/DME etc???
Should be some interesting discussions next year...
Ultimately there should be a VSA MAP developed for each arrival runway to cater for the MAP/Go Round/comm failure etc. These probably need to be structured very similar to instrument MAPs to cater for all the scenarios where Visual conditions may not be maintained during the MAP; ie re establishing above minimum terrain altitudes etc.
I also believe there were a couple of recommendations out of this years paper, but don't have them to hand right now.