What is it?
- Often policy makers require a short deadline and a systematic review for synthesizing the evidence is not practical
- A rapid review speeds up the systematic review process by omitting stages of the systematic review making it less rigorous
Rapid Reviews are best designed for:
- New or emerging research topics
- updates of previous reviews
- critical topics
- assess what is already known about a policy or practice using some systematic review methods
Outline of Stages
Timeframe:
- ≤ 5 weeks (varies)
- Depends on many factors such as but not limited to:
- resources available
- the quantity and quality of the literature
- the expertise or experience of reviewers (Grant et al. 2009)
Question:
- Narrow question, may use PICO
Sources and searches:
- Sources are limited due to time constraints of searching
- Still uses transparent and reproducible search methods
Selection:
- Based on inclusion/exclusion criteria
Appraisal:
- Critical and rigorous but time limited
Synthesis:
- Descriptive summary or categorization of data
- may still be quantitative
(Source: Khangura S. et al. (2012) Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach)
Limitations
- Search is not as comprehensive
- In come cases, there may only be one reviewer.
- Possible non-blinded appraisal and selection
- Limited/cautious interpretation of the findings
- No universally accepted definition of a "rapid review"
- Be mindful of limitations and potential biases when cutting corners.
- Can impact policy and practice but systematic reviews are still needed
- You still need a content expert and those experienced with systematic reviews
(Source: Cochrane: Rapid Reviews-An Introduction (2014)
Other Names
- Rapid Evidence Review
- Rapid Evidence Assessment
- Rapid Systematic Review
- Expedited Review
- Rapid Evidence Summary
Credit:
Adapted from Temple University Health Science Libraries
