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
-
Artificial intelligence software for analysing chest X-ray images to identify suspected lung cancer: an evidence synthesis early value assessment.Health Technol Assess. 2024 Aug;28(50):1-75. doi: 10.3310/LKRT4721. Health Technol Assess. 2024. PMID: 39254229 Free PMC article.
-
Refining the hospitalization rate: A mixed methods approach to differentiate primary COVID-19 from incidental cases.Infect Prev Pract. 2024 May 15;6(3):100371. doi: 10.1016/j.infpip.2024.100371. eCollection 2024 Sep. Infect Prev Pract. 2024. PMID: 38855736 Free PMC article.
-
The Power of Rapid Reviews for Bridging the Knowledge-to-Action Gap in Evidence-Based Virtual Health Care.J Med Internet Res. 2024 May 22;26:e54821. doi: 10.2196/54821. J Med Internet Res. 2024. PMID: 38776542 Free PMC article.
-
Co-design of the Spinal Cord Injury Health Maintenance Tool to Support Self-Management: A Mixed-Methods Approach.Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2024 Winter;30(1):59-73. doi: 10.46292/sci23-00042. Epub 2024 Feb 29. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2024. PMID: 38433736
-
Factors Influencing the Acceptability, Acceptance, and Adoption of Conversational Agents in Health Care: Integrative Review.J Med Internet Res. 2023 Sep 26;25:e46548. doi: 10.2196/46548. J Med Internet Res. 2023. PMID: 37751279 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
