A rapid research needs appraisal methodology to identify evidence gaps to inform clinical research priorities in response to outbreaks—results from the Lassa fever pilot

Abstract

Background Infectious disease epidemics are a constant threat, and while we can strengthen preparedness in advance, inevitably, we will sometimes be caught unaware by novel outbreaks. To address the challenge of rapidly identifying clinical research priorities in those circumstances, we developed and piloted a protocol for carrying out a systematic, rapid research needs appraisal (RRNA) of existing evidence within 5 days in response to outbreaks globally, with the aim to inform clinical research prioritization. Methods The protocol was derived from rapid review methodologies and optimized through effective use of pre-defined templates and global time zones. It was piloted using a Lassa fever (LF) outbreak scenario. Databases were searched from 1969 to July 2017. Systematic reviewers based in Canada, the UK, and the Philippines screened and extracted data using a systematic review software. The pilot was evaluated through internal analysis and by comparing the research priorities identified from the data, with those identified by an external LF expert panel. Results The RRNA pilot was completed within 5 days. To accommodate the high number of articles identified, data extraction was prioritized by study design and year, and the clinical research prioritization done post-day 5. Of 118 potentially eligible articles, 52 met the data extraction criteria, of which 46 were extracted within the 5-day time frame. The RRNA team identified 19 clinical research priorities; the expert panel independently identified 21, of which 11 priorities overlapped. Each method identified a unique set of priorities, showing that combining both methods for clinical research prioritization is more robust than using either method alone. Conclusions This pilot study shows that it is feasible to carry out a systematic RRNA within 5 days in response to a (re-) emerging outbreak to identify gaps in existing evidence, as long as sufficient resources are identified, and reviewers are experienced and trained in advance. Use of an online systematic review software and global time zones effectively optimized resources. Another 3 to 5 days are recommended for review of the extracted data and to formulate clinical research priorities. The RRNA can be used for a “Disease X” scenario and should optimally be combined with an expert panel to ensure breadth and depth of coverage of clinical research priorities. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-019-1338-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Accessibility, inclusivity, and implementation of COVID-19 clinical management guidelines early in the pandemic: a global survey

“…This should include a flexible tiered approach, with recommendations tailored to different resourced health systems, enabling sites to switch between tiers as resources becomes available or depleted. Local prioritisation processes in the form of rapid research needs appraisals could also identify key contextual areas to update 28,29 .…”

Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice toward COVID-19 among Healthy Population in the Philippines

“…Moreover, current reports of virus transmission from asymptomatic individuals (Zheming et al, 2020). Infectious disease epidemics are a constant threat to everyone (Sigfrid et al, 2019). On July 24, 2020, WHO has reported more than 15 million confirmed COVID-19 cases and had over 600,000 deaths worldwide (World Health Organization, 2020).…”

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the epidemiology of Lassa virus in humans, rodents and other mammals in sub-Saharan Africa

“…To this end, epidemiological data from zoonotic viruses such as LASV in humans and animals are crucial in guiding common responses to this health threat. Furthermore, a recent study reported that the detection rate of the LASV in asymptomatic individuals and the identification of populations at high risk were at crucial importance [ 21 ]. We explored both the case fatality rate of the LASV in various category of human populations and the prevalence of LASV in humans, rodents and others mammals.…”