Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Apr 13;1(2):e12006.
doi: 10.1002/cesm.12006. eCollection 2023 Apr.

How to develop rapid reviews of diagnostic tests according to experts: A qualitative exploration of researcher views

Ingrid Arevalo-Rodriguez  1   2 , Susan Baxter  3 , Karen R Steingart  4 , Andrea C Tricco  5   6 , Barbara Nussbaumer-Streit  7 , David Kaunelis  8 , Pablo Alonso-Coello  9   10 , Patrick M Bossuyt  11 , Javier Zamora  1   2
Affiliations

How to develop rapid reviews of diagnostic tests according to experts: A qualitative exploration of researcher views

Ingrid Arevalo-Rodriguez et al. Cochrane Evid Synth Methods. .

Abstract

Background: Rapid reviews (RRs) have been used to provide timely evidence for policymakers, health providers, and the public in several healthcare scenarios, most recently during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Despite the essential role of diagnosis in clinical management, data about how to perform RRs of diagnostic tests are scarce. We aimed to explore the views and perceptions of experts in evidence synthesis and diagnostic evidence about the value of methods used to accelerate the review process.

Methods: We performed semistructured interviews with a purposive sample of experts in evidence synthesis and diagnostic evidence. We carried out the interviews in English between July and December 2021. Initial reading and coding of the transcripts were performed using NVIVO qualitative data analysis software.

Results: Of a total of 23 invited experts, 16 (70%) responded. We interviewed all 16 participants representing key roles in evidence synthesis. We identified 14 recurring themes including the review question, characteristics of the review team, and use of automation, as the topics with the highest number of quotes. Some participants considered several methodological "shortcuts" to be ineffective or risky, such as automating quality appraisal, using only one reviewer for diagnostic data extraction and only performing descriptive analysis. The introduction of limits might depend on whether the test being assessed is a new test, the availability of alternative tests, the needs of providers and patients, and the availability of high-quality systematic reviews.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that organizational strategies (e.g., defining the review question, availability of a highly experienced team) may have a role in conducting RRs of diagnostic tests. Several methodological shortcuts were considered inadequate for accelerating the review process, though they need to be assessed in well-designed studies. Improved reporting of RRs would support evidence-based decision-making and help users of RRs understand their limitations.

Keywords: accelerated methods; diagnostic tests; evidence synthesis; rapid reviews; systematic reviews.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Hamel C, Michaud A, Thuku M, et al. Defining rapid reviews: a systematic scoping review and thematic analysis of definitions and defining characteristics of rapid reviews. JCE. 2021;129:74‐85. - PubMed
    1. Tricco AC, Khalil H, Holly C, et al. Rapid reviews and the methodological rigor of evidence synthesis: a JBI position statement. JBI Evid Synth. 2022;20(4):944‐949. - PubMed
    1. Mijumbi‐Deve RM, Kawooya I, Kayongo E, et al. Paper 1: demand‐driven rapid reviews for health policy and systems decision‐making: lessons from Lebanon, Ethiopia, and South Africa on researchers and policymakers' experiences. Syst Rev. 2022;11(1):154. - PMC - PubMed
    1. El‐Yousfi S, Jones K, White S, Marshman Z. A rapid review of barriers to oral healthcare for vulnerable people. Br Dent J. 2019;227(2):143‐151. - PubMed
    1. Ismail SA, Abbara A, Collin SM, et al. Communicable disease surveillance and control in the context of conflict and mass displacement in Syria. Int J Infect Dis. 2016;47:15‐22. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources