Rapid reviews methods series: assessing the appropriateness of conducting a rapid review

被引:6
|
作者
Garritty, Chantelle [1 ,2 ]
Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara [3 ]
Hamel, Candyce [1 ,4 ]
Devane, Declan [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ottawa, Sch Epidemiol & Publ Hlth, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[2] Publ Hlth Agcy Canada, Global Hlth & Guidelines Div, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Continuing Educ Krems, Dept Evidence based Med & Evaluat, Cochrane Austria, Krems, Niederosterreic, Austria
[4] Canadian Assoc Radiologists, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[5] Univ Galway, Sch Nursing & Midwifery, Cochrane Ireland & Evidence Synth Ireland, Galway, Ireland
关键词
Methods; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Clinical Decision-Making; SURVEILLANCE; KNOWLEDGE; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112722
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
This paper, part of the Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group series, offers guidance on determining when to conduct a rapid review (RR) instead of a full systematic review (SR). While both review types aim to comprehensively synthesise evidence, RRs, conducted within a shorter time frame of typically 6 months or less, involve streamlined methods to expedite the process. The decision to opt for an RR depends on the urgency of the research question, resource availability and the impact on decision outcomes. The paper categorises scenarios where RRs are appropriate, including urgent decision-making, informing guidelines, assessing new technologies and identifying evidence gaps. It also outlines instances when RRs may be inappropriate, cautioning against conducting them solely for ease, quick publication or only cost-saving motives.When deciding on an RR, it is crucial to consider both conceptual and practical factors. These factors encompass the urgency of needing timely evidence, the consequences of waiting for a full SR, the potential risks associated with incomplete evidence, and the risk of not using synthesised evidence in decision-making, among other considerations. Key factors to weigh also include having a clearly defined need, a manageable scope and access to the necessary expertise. Overall, this paper aims to guide informed judgements about whether to choose an RR over an SR based on the specific research question and context. Researchers and decision-makers are encouraged to carefully weigh potential trade-offs when opting for RRs.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Rapid reviews methods series: Guidance on assessing the certainty of evidence
    Gartlehner, Gerald
    Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara
    Devane, Declan
    Kahwati, Leila
    Viswanathan, Meera
    King, Valerie J.
    Qaseem, Amir
    Akl, Elie
    Schuenemann, Holger J.
    Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Grp
    BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE, 2024, 29 (01) : 50 - 54
  • [2] Rapid reviews methods series: considerations and recommendations for evidence synthesis in rapid reviews
    King, Valerie J.
    Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara
    Shaw, Elizabeth
    Devane, Declan
    Kahwati, Leila
    Viswanathan, Meera
    Gartlehner, Gerald
    BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE, 2024,
  • [3] Rapid reviews methods series: guidance on rapid qualitative evidence synthesis
    Booth, Andrew
    Sommer, Isolde
    Noyes, Jane
    Houghton, Catherine
    Campbell, Fiona
    BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE, 2024, 29 (03) : 194 - 200
  • [4] Rapid review method series: interim guidance for the reporting of rapid reviews
    Stevens, Adrienne
    Hersi, Mona
    Garritty, Chantelle
    Hartling, Lisa
    Shea, Beverley J.
    Stewart, Lesley A.
    Welch, Vivian Andrea
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE, 2024,
  • [5] Rapid reviews methods series: Guidance on literature search
    Klerings, Irma
    Robalino, Shannon
    Booth, Andrew
    Escobar-Liquitay, Camila Micaela
    Sommer, Isolde
    Gartlehner, Gerald
    Devane, Declan
    Waffenschmidt, Siw
    BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE, 2023, 28 (06) : 412 - 417
  • [6] Updated recommendations for the Cochrane rapid review methods guidance for rapid reviews of effectiveness
    Garritty, Chantelle
    Hamel, Candyce
    Trivella, Marialena
    Gartlehner, Gerald
    Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara
    Devane, Declan
    Kamel, Chris
    Griebler, Ursula
    King, Valerie J.
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2024, 384
  • [7] Guidelines for conducting rapid reviews in psychology research
    Evan du Toit, Ryan
    de Klerk, Werner
    JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY IN AFRICA, 2022, 32 (06) : 640 - 647
  • [8] Reflections on conducting rapid reviews of educational research
    Cirkony, Connie
    Rickinson, Mark
    Walsh, Lucas
    Gleeson, Jo
    Salisbury, Mandy
    Cutler, Blake
    EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, 2022, 64 (04) : 371 - 390
  • [9] Rapid reviews methods series (paper 7): guidance on rapid scoping, mapping and evidence and gap map ('Big Picture Reviews')
    Campbell, Fiona
    Sutton, Anthea
    Pollock, Danielle
    Garritty, Chantelle
    Tricco, Andrea C.
    Schmidt, Lena
    Khalil, Hanan
    BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE, 2025,
  • [10] METHODS AND CONTEXT FOR THE PRODUCTION OF RAPID REVIEWS
    Kato, E. U.
    Hartling, L.
    Guise, J. M.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2015, 18 (03) : A36 - A36