Community Rapid Review v3

This is the latest iteration to our thinking around a community rapid review system.  Two important things to stress: Firstly, the notion of being nurturing, supportive and educational is being seen as overwhelmingly positive – something I’m delighted with. Secondly, the idea is not to be in competition with systematic reviews or produce ‘cut down’ systematic reviews.  The idea is that there is a continuum of … Continue reading Community Rapid Review v3

Community rapid review: creating the right environment for novices

Creating the right environment to encourage users seems an essential element of any rapid review community.  Potential users will include health professionals with lots of experience in answering their clinical questions.  Similarly, there will be many information specialists with high levels of skills and experience.  For them, simply creating a rapid review ‘structure’ will be sufficient. However, a much bigger challenge is to encourage potential … Continue reading Community rapid review: creating the right environment for novices

Community rapid review

Last week I posted Making a community rapid review system as a way to see if there was interest in the concept.  The post has been viewed hundreds of times and we’ve now got a significant number of people who want to get involved to help shape the concept.  The response has been so positive my assumption is that we’ll build such a system. However, we … Continue reading Community rapid review

Making a community rapid review system

Rapid reviews are still being widely discussed and people are still trying to understand what they are!.  As well as all the talk there is much action, with many rapid reviews being undertaken using many different methods. If it’s not widely known, this blog was created by myself (Jon Brassey) who also created the Trip Database.  With my ‘Trip Database’ hat on the whole notion … Continue reading Making a community rapid review system

Two new articles and one non-surprise – RRs and SRs give similar results

Two new articles to highlight: Using rapid reviews: an example from a study conducted to inform policy-making. O’Leary DF et al. Research Methodology December 2016 Methods for Developing Evidence Reviews in Short Periods of Time: A Scoping Review. Abou-Setta AM et al. PLoS ONE 11(12) 2016 I’ll have to do a reference trawl of the latter one as it reports: Studies comparing the conclusions of … Continue reading Two new articles and one non-surprise – RRs and SRs give similar results

Rapid HTAs and a research protocol

Two new articles: Rapid reviews with health-technology assessments in reimbursement systems – an examination of Ireland as a case study. Murphy A et al. Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment | Vol. 4 | Issue 1 – 2017 Assessing the validity of abbreviated literature searches for rapid reviews: protocol of a non-inferiority and meta-epidemiologic study. Nussbaumer-Streit B et al. Systematic Reviews 2016 5:197 Continue reading Rapid HTAs and a research protocol

The rise of rapid reviews? Growth compared with systematic reviews

A simple experiment, searching PubMed for mentions of rapid reviews over time and doing a similar thing with systematic reviews. For my own sake I lumped (technical term) some earlier dates to give the following results for rapid reviews: 1980-89 – 10 1990-1999 – 25 2000-2004 – 32 2005-2009 – 31 2010 – 10 2011 – 14 2012 – 11 2013 – 18 2014 – … Continue reading The rise of rapid reviews? Growth compared with systematic reviews

Supporting policy – rapid response and rapid evidence maps

Two new articles to report, both linked to supporting policy. Designing a rapid response program to support evidence-informed decision-making in the Americas region: using the best available evidence and case studies Haby MM et al. Implementation Science 2016 11:117 Conclusions: When designing a new rapid response program, greater attention needs to be given to specifying the rapid review methods and reporting these in sufficient detail to allow … Continue reading Supporting policy – rapid response and rapid evidence maps

Two new papers

The International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care has recently published two new articles on rapid reviews: 1) Using the amstar checklist for rapid reviews: is it feasible? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016 Oct 18:1-8. Mattivi JT, Buchberger B. Conclusions: With some adjustments, AMSTAR can be used as a checklist for rapid reviews to describe methodological restrictions in comparison to systematic reviews and to … Continue reading Two new papers