Yesterday I saw a tweet that read: The risk rapid reviews is if we get it wrong – how much wrong are we ready to risk This is an important point. It is not the first time I’ve had people discuss rapid reviews and framing it as how often are you prepared to be wrong? I always find it slightly annoying as – unintentionally I’m … Continue reading On being wrong and/or sanctimonious
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
Expediting evidence synthesis for healthcare decision-making: exploring attitudes and perceptions towards rapid reviews using Q methodology. Kelly SE et al. PeerJ 4:e2522 A lovely paper that explores attitudes towards rapid reviews. The abstract is as follows: Background Rapid reviews expedite the knowledge synthesis process with the goal of providing timely information to healthcare decision-makers who want to use evidence-informed policy and practice approaches. A range … Continue reading Expediting evidence synthesis for healthcare decision-making: exploring attitudes and perceptions towards rapid reviews using Q methodology
The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study. Hartling L et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2016 16:127 How much searching should be undertaken when performing a systematic review? There have been a number of other articles exploring this, many captured on this site (Restricting the databases (or language) for a search) but as the authors of this paper point … Continue reading New article: The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews
Rapid-Reviews.info 