Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: an inventory of current methods and practice in health technology assessment
- PMID: 18400114
- DOI: 10.1017/S0266462308080185
Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: an inventory of current methods and practice in health technology assessment
Erratum in
- Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008 Summer;24(3):369
Abstract
Objectives: This review assessed current practice in the preparation of rapid reviews by health technology assessment (HTA) organizations, both internationally and in the Australian context, and evaluated the available peer-reviewed literature pertaining to the methodology used in the preparation of these reviews.
Methods: A survey tool was developed and distributed to a total of fifty International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) members and other selected HTA organizations. Data on a broad range of themes related to the conduct of rapid reviews were collated, discussed narratively, and subjected to simple statistical analysis where appropriate. Systematic searches of the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Australian Medical Index were undertaken in March 2007 to identify literature pertaining to rapid review methodology. Comparative studies, guidelines, program evaluations, methods studies, commentaries, and surveys were considered for inclusion.
Results: Twenty-three surveys were returned (46 percent), with eighteen agencies reporting on thirty-six rapid review products. Axiomatic trends were identified, but there was little cohesion between organizations regarding the contents, methods, and definition of a rapid review. The twelve studies identified by the systematic literature search did not specifically address the methodology underpinning rapid review; rather, many highlighted the complexity of the area. Authors suggested restricted research questions and truncated search strategies as methods to limit the time taken to complete a review.
Conclusions: Rather than developing a formalized methodology by which to conduct rapid reviews, agencies should work toward increasing the transparency of the methods used for each review. It is perhaps the appropriate use, not the appropriate methodology, of a rapid review that requires future consideration.
Similar articles
-
Rapid versus full systematic reviews: validity in clinical practice?ANZ J Surg. 2008 Nov;78(11):1037-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2008.04730.x. ANZ J Surg. 2008. PMID: 18959712 Review.
-
What is a rapid review? A methodological exploration of rapid reviews in Health Technology Assessments.Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2012 Dec;10(4):397-410. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2012.00290.x. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2012. PMID: 23173665
-
Development of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 Jul;25 Suppl 1:24-7. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090370. Epub 2009 Jun 8. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009. PMID: 19500434 Review.
-
Practical tools and methods for health technology assessment in Europe: structures, methodologies, and tools developed by the European Network for Health Technology Assessment, EUnetHTA.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 Dec;25 Suppl 2:1-8. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309990626. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009. PMID: 20030885
-
International comparison and review of a health technology assessment skills program.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005 Spring;21(2):253-62. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005. PMID: 15921067
Cited by
-
Quality of conduct and reporting in rapid reviews: an exploration of compliance with PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines.Syst Rev. 2016 May 10;5:79. doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0258-9. Syst Rev. 2016. PMID: 27160255 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Research co-design in health: a rapid overview of reviews.Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Feb 11;18(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-0528-9. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020. PMID: 32046728 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches.Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 14;4(1):5. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-5. Syst Rev. 2015. PMID: 25588314 Free PMC article.
-
Understanding Interactions Between Caregivers and Care Recipients in Person-Centered Dementia Care: A Rapid Review.Clin Interv Aging. 2020 Sep 14;15:1637-1647. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S255454. eCollection 2020. Clin Interv Aging. 2020. PMID: 32982198 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Expediting evidence synthesis for healthcare decision-making: exploring attitudes and perceptions towards rapid reviews using Q methodology.PeerJ. 2016 Oct 6;4:e2522. doi: 10.7717/peerj.2522. eCollection 2016. PeerJ. 2016. PMID: 27761324 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources