A scoping review of rapid review methods

Background Rapid reviews are a form of knowledge synthesis in which components of the systematic review process are simplified or omitted to produce information in a timely manner. Although numerous centers are conducting rapid reviews internationally, few studies have examined the methodological characteristics of rapid reviews. We aimed to examine articles, books, and reports that evaluated, compared, used or described rapid reviews or methods through a scoping review. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, internet websites of rapid review producers, and reference lists were searched to identify articles for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened literature search results and abstracted data from included studies. Descriptive analysis was conducted. Results We included 100 articles plus one companion report that were published between 1997 and 2013. The studies were categorized as 84 application papers, seven development papers, six impact papers, and four comparison papers (one was included in two categories). The rapid reviews were conducted between 1 and 12 months, predominantly in Europe (58 %) and North America (20 %). The included studies failed to report 6 % to 73 % of the specific systematic review steps examined. Fifty unique rapid review methods were identified; 16 methods occurred more than once. Streamlined methods that were used in the 82 rapid reviews included limiting the literature search to published literature (24 %) or one database (2 %), limiting inclusion criteria by date (68 %) or language (49 %), having one person screen and another verify or screen excluded studies (6 %), having one person abstract data and another verify (23 %), not conducting risk of bias/quality appraisal (7 %) or having only one reviewer conduct the quality appraisal (7 %), and presenting results as a narrative summary (78 %). Four case studies were identified that compared the results of rapid reviews to systematic reviews. Three studies found that the conclusions between rapid reviews and systematic reviews were congruent. Conclusions Numerous rapid review approaches were identified and few were used consistently in the literature. Poor quality of reporting was observed. A prospective study comparing the results from rapid reviews to those obtained through systematic reviews is warranted. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0465-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.


Title & abstracts
≥ 2 independent reviewers SR method: both L1 and L2 screening had two independent reviewers Partially streamlined: either L1 and L2 had one reviewer and one verifier Fully streamlined: not done/ not reported, done but unclear In order to produce a robust but also timely appraisal of the evidence, a rapid review methodology was adopted, with the aim of creating a baseline resource which could be used in future for further work. The report is based on a limited literature search and is not comprehensive, systematic reviews. The intent is to provide a list of sources and a summary of the best evidence on the topic that CADTH could identify using all reasonable efforts within the time allowed.

Geddes, 2011 Rapid Review
Rapid reviews are literature reviews that use methods to accelerate or streamline traditional systematic review processes. Target audiences for rapid reviews include government policymakers, healthcare institutions, health professionals, and patient associations to inform health system planning and policy development Rapid reviews are a new and contentious approach to knowledge transfer and exchange between researchers and policy makers. They are typically conducted in months rather than years and the focus is determined by policy-makers rather than researchers. The strength of a rapid review lies in its timeliness and responsiveness to the needs of policy makers and practitioners, but its limitations include the reliability and generalisability of the findings.
Gannan R, Cilska D, Thomas H. Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implementation Science 2010; 5(56). A rapid systematic review in which the methodology has been limited in one or more areas to shorten the timeline for its completion. This rapid review is a limited evidence-based assessment that is based on a simple systematic search of studies published in the peer reviewed literature. As a result, this rapid review may be used to inform certain questions on the specific review topic.

Rapid Systematic Review
A rapid systematic review in which the methodology has been limited in one or more areas to shorten the timeline for its completion. This rapid review is a limited evidence-based assessment that is based on a simple systematic search of studies published in the peer reviewed literature. As a result, this rapid review may be used to inform certain questions on the specific review topic.

Rapid Systematic Review
A rapid systematic review in which the methodology has been limited in one or more areas to shorten the timeline for its completion. This rapid review is a limited evidence-based assessment that is based on a simple systematic search of studies published in the peer reviewed literature. As a result, this rapid review may be used to inform certain questions on the specific review topic.

Rapid Systematic Review
A rapid systematic review in which the methodology has been limited in one or more areas to shorten the timeline for its completion. This rapid review is a limited evidence-based assessment that is based on a simple systematic search of studies published in the peer reviewed literature. As a result, this rapid review may be used to inform certain questions on the specific review topic.

Maddern, 2008
Rapid Systematic Review A rapid systematic review in which the methodology has been limited in one or more areas to shorten the timeline for its completion. This rapid review is a limited evidence-based assessment that is based on a simple systematic search of studies published in the peer reviewed literature. Accelerated systematic reviews are produced in response to a pressing need for a systematic summary and appraisal of the available literature for a new or emerging surgical procedure. They use the same methodology as full systematic reviews, but may restrict the types of studies considered (for example, by only including comparative studies and not case series) in order to produce the review in a shorter time period than a full systematic review.

Mitchell, 2011
Rapid Health Technology Assessment (Evidence inventory report) Expedited production of short-form evidence inventory reports.
In an evidence inventory report the authors leave the 'patient' element of PICO unspecified and then assess how much evidence there is for the intervention in question, stratifying by patient group. The inventory process would work equally well assessing the quantity of evidence on different variations of a particular intervention for a particular patient group. In order to produce a robust but also timely appraisal of the evidence, a rapid review methodology was adopted, with the aim of creating a baseline resource which could be used in future for further work.

Mitchell, 2011
Expedited production of short-form evidence inventory reports. In an evidence inventory report the authors leave the 'patient' element of PICO unspecified and then assess how much evidence there is for the intervention in question, stratifying by patient group. The inventory process would work equally well assessing the quantity of evidence on different variations of a particular intervention for a particular patient group.