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

Expediting evidence synthesis for healthcare decision-making: exploring attitudes and perceptions towards rapid reviews using Q methodology

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

New article: The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews

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

The use of rapid review methods in health technology assessments: 3 case studies

The use of rapid review methods in health technology assessments: 3 case studies Kaltenthaler E et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2016 16:108   Abstract Background Rapid reviews are of increasing importance within health technology assessment due to time and resource constraints. There are many rapid review methods available although there is little guidance as to the most suitable methods. We present three case studies … Continue reading The use of rapid review methods in health technology assessments: 3 case studies

Sampling in evidence synthesis

One of the main criticisms of ‘rapid reviews’ is that they cuts corner (relative to systematic reviews) and therefore it makes the likely to be – in some way – ‘wrong’ (however that is defined).  This negativity is often taken from the perspective that a full systematic review is – in some way – ‘right’ (again, however that is defined). What is increasingly clear to me … Continue reading Sampling in evidence synthesis

New article: User survey finds rapid evidence reviews increased uptake of evidence by Veterans Health Administration leadership to inform fast-paced health-system decision-making

User survey finds rapid evidence reviews increased uptake of evidence by Veterans Health Administration leadership to inform fast-paced health-system decision-making. Peterson K et al. Systematic Reviews 2016 5:132 Background To provide evidence synthesis for faster-paced healthcare decision-making, rapid reviews have emerged as a streamlined alternative to standard systematic reviews. In 2012, the Veterans Affairs Evidence-based Synthesis Program (VA ESP) added rapid reviews to support Veterans … Continue reading New article: User survey finds rapid evidence reviews increased uptake of evidence by Veterans Health Administration leadership to inform fast-paced health-system decision-making

The nature of evidence synthesis

Evidence Live has come and gone and I had a wonderful chat with Iain Chalmers.  Iain is a marvel and in the course of the conversation I had a ‘light bulb’ moment relating to the nature of rapid versus systematic reviews.  I’m increasingly unhappy with the distinction and I am of the view that the debate should not be ‘rapid’ versus ‘systematic’ but how, for a given context, can … Continue reading The nature of evidence synthesis