Table 5 Summary of rapid review streamlined approaches (n = 82 application studies)
Rapid review methods | Count (%) | |
|---|---|---|
General | Â | |
Duration of review | Â | |
| Â | >6Â months | 3 (4Â %) |
|  | ≤6 months | 19 (23 %) |
| Â | Not reported | 60 (73Â %) |
Published protocol | Â | |
| Â | Mentioned | 2 (2Â %) |
| Â | Not mentioned | 80 (98Â %) |
Review question | Â | |
| Â | Clearly reported | 81 (99Â %) |
| Â | Unclear/inferred | 1 (1Â %) |
Identifying relevant studies | Â | |
Databases searched | Â | |
| Â | Searched more than one database | 67 (82Â %) |
| Â | Searched one database only | 2 (2Â %) |
| Â | Used a previous review(s) as starting point | 8 (10Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 5 (6Â %) |
Grey literature | Â | |
| Â | Searched grey literature | 57 (70Â %) |
| Â | No grey literature search | 20 (24Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 5 (6Â %) |
Search strategy | Â | |
| Â | Clearly reported | 64 (78Â %) |
| Â | Unclear | 7 (9Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 11 (13Â %) |
Scanned references | Â | |
| Â | Yes | 41 (50Â %) |
| Â | No | 8 (10Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 33 (40Â %) |
Contacted authors | Â | |
| Â | Yes | 18 (22Â %) |
| Â | No | 9 (11Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 55 (67Â %) |
Limits applied | Â | Â |
Date | Â | Â |
| Â | No limit | 10 (12Â %) |
| Â | Limited by date | 56 (68Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 16 (20Â %) |
Language | Â | Â |
| Â | No limit | 14 (17Â %) |
| Â | Limited by language | 40 (49Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 28 (34Â %) |
Selecting relevant studies | Â | |
Titles and abstracts | Â | |
| Â | Two or more independent reviewers | 28 (34Â %) |
| Â | One reviewer and one verifier | 4 (5Â %) |
| Â | One reviewer only | 15 (18Â %) |
| Â | Done but unclear number of reviewers | 20 (24Â %) |
| Â | Not done | 1 (1Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 14 (17Â %) |
Full-texts | Â | Â |
| Â | Two or more independent reviewers | 20 (24Â %) |
| Â | One reviewer and one verifier | 5 (6Â %) |
| Â | One reviewer only | 9 (11Â %) |
| Â | Done but unclear number of reviewers | 23 (28Â %) |
| Â | Not done | 1 (1Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 24 (29Â %) |
Data abstraction and quality appraisal | Â | |
Data abstraction | Â | |
| Â | Two or more independent reviewers | 8 (10Â %) |
| Â | One reviewer and one verifier | 19 (23Â %) |
| Â | One reviewer only | 6 (7Â %) |
| Â | Done but unclear number of reviewers | 30 (37Â %) |
| Â | Not done | 1 (1Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 18 (22Â %) |
Quality appraisal | Â | |
| Â | Two or more independent reviewers | 14 (17Â %) |
| Â | One reviewer and one verifier | 11 (13Â %) |
| Â | One reviewer only | 6 (7Â %) |
| Â | Done but unclear number of reviewers | 24 (29Â %) |
| Â | Not done | 6 (7Â %) |
| Â | Not reported | 21 (26Â %) |
Data synthesis | Â | Â |
Data synthesis | Â | Â |
| Â | Meta-analysis or clear reasons for not pooling results | 18 (22Â %) |
| Â | Narrative/descriptive summary only | 64 (78Â %) |