A taxonomy of rapid reviews links report types and methods to specific decision-making contexts

Hartling, Lisa; Guise, Jeanne Marie; Kato, Elisabeth; Anderson, Johanna; Belinson, Suzanne; Berliner, Elise; Dryden, Donna M; Featherstone, Robin; Mitchell, Matthew D.; Motu’apuaka, Makalapua; Noorani, Hussein Z; Paynter, Robin; Robinson, Karen A.; Schoelles, Karen M; Umscheid, Craig A.; Whitlock, Evelyn P

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.05.036

Cited by 71 publications

(126 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

120

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results generally support reviewers to limit their searches in the interests of efficiencies without an important impact on results (in the vast majority of cases). Our results may be particularly relevant for rapid reviews, which are intended to produce evidence reports more quickly and efficiently than traditional SRs [27–29]. In rapid reviews, searching is one step that is typically modified to create efficiencies [29, 30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our results may be particularly relevant for rapid reviews, which are intended to produce evidence reports more quickly and efficiently than traditional SRs [27–29]. In rapid reviews, searching is one step that is typically modified to create efficiencies [29, 30]. Changes include searching fewer databases, limiting the search for grey literature, and restricting by language of publication (e.g., English only) [23].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Grey literature in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of the contribution of non-English reports, unpublished studies and dissertations to the results of meta-analyses in child-relevant reviews

Hartling

Featherstone

Nuspl

et al. 2017

BMC Med Res Methodol

Self Cite

243

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSystematic reviews (SRs) are an important source of information about healthcare interventions. A key component of a well-conducted SR is a comprehensive literature search. There is limited evidence on the contribution of non-English reports, unpublished studies, and dissertations and their impact on results of meta-analyses.MethodsOur sample included SRs from three Cochrane Review Groups: Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI), Infectious Diseases (ID), Developmental Psychosocial and Learning Problems (DPLP) (n = 129). Outcomes included: 1) proportion of reviews that searched for and included each study type; 2) proportion of relevant studies represented by each study type; and 3) impact on results and conclusions of the primary meta-analysis for each study type.ResultsMost SRs searched for non-English studies; however, these were included in only 12% of reviews and represented less than 5% of included studies. There was a change in results in only four reviews (total sample = 129); in two cases the change did not have an impact on the statistical or clinical significance of results. Most SRs searched for unpublished studies but the majority did not include these (only 6%) and they represented 2% of included studies. In most cases the impact of including unpublished studies was small; a substantial impact was observed in one case that relied solely on unpublished data. Few reviews in ARI (9%) and ID (3%) searched for dissertations compared to 65% in DPLP. Overall, dissertations were included in only nine SRs and represented less than 2% of included studies. In the majority of cases the change in results was negligible or small; in the case where a large change was noted, the estimate was more conservative without dissertations.ConclusionsThe majority of SRs searched for non-English and unpublished studies; however, these represented a small proportion of included studies and rarely impacted the results and conclusions of the review. Inclusion of these study types may have an impact in situations where there are few relevant studies, or where there are questionable vested interests in the published literature. We found substantial variation in whether SRs searched for dissertations; in most reviews that included dissertations, these had little impact on results.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0347-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grey literature in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of the contribution of non-English reports, unpublished studies and dissertations to the results of meta-analyses in child-relevant reviews

Hartling

Featherstone

Nuspl

et al. 2017

BMC Med Res Methodol

Self Cite

243

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…"Automated approaches" generated meta-analyses in response to user-defined queries. 33 In a second EPC methodology project, several end-users were interviewed (key informants including guideline developers, health care providers/health system organizations, research funders, and payers/health insurers). 10 Informants described the use of evidence inventories "to stimulate discussion, challenge the status quo or get a sense of the literature when there is a pressing concern."…”

Section: Types Of Evidence Synthesis Sought By Health Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for Conceptualizing Evidence Needs of Health Systems

Schoelles¹,

Umscheid²,

Lin³

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PrefaceThe Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), through its Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs), sponsors the development of evidence reports and technology assessments to assist public-and private-sector organizations in their efforts to improve the quality of health care in the United States.The reports and assessments provide organizations with comprehensive, science-based information on common, costly medical conditions and new health care technologies and strategies. The EPCs systematically review the relevant scientific literature on topics assigned to them by AHRQ and conduct additional analyses when appropriate prior to developing their reports and assessments.To improve the scientific rigor of these evidence reports, AHRQ supports empiric research by the EPCs to help understand or improve complex methodologic issues in systematic reviews. These methods research projects are intended to contribute to the research base in and be used to improve the science of systematic reviews. They are not intended to be guidance to the EPC program, although may be considered by EPCs along with other scientific research when determining EPC program methods guidance.AHRQ expects that the EPC evidence reports and technology assessments will inform individual health plans, providers, and purchasers as well as the health care system as a whole by providing important information to help improve health care quality. The reports undergo peer review prior to their release as a final report.If AcknowledgmentsThe authors gratefully acknowledge the input of the late Robert Lewis Kane, M.D., who was a member of our workgroup until his unexpected death on March 6, 2017. Dr. Kane stimulated the conversation of our workgroup with his ideas and challenges, and inspired creation of the initial framework for our efforts (See Appendix B).The authors also acknowledge two health system representatives, Lucy Savitz, Ph.D., and Charles P. Friedman, Ph.D. for their feedback on our initial framework and draft report. A Framework for Conceptualizing Evidence Needs of Health Systems Structured AbstractObjectives. To develop a framework for understanding the evidence needs of health systems to inform the AHRQ EPC Program future efforts.Data sources. Three data sources were used: (a) peer-reviewed literature from a systematic search of English-language publications in MEDLINE from January 2007-April 2017, (b) original data from four programs serving health system requests for evidence syntheses, and (c) input during a face-to-face meeting at AHRQ in June 2017 from health system stakeholders and EPC investigators.Methods. Data were synthesized narratively and thematically. We developed an initial framework to guide discussion and qualitative analysis. We built consensus around themes and refinement of the framework through weekly phone conferences, electronic communications, and a face-to-face meeting of workgroup members and health systems experts. Results.From the literature review, we found that health systems seek evidence to ...

show abstract

“…Studies with adult populations had similar issues with study quality as those reported for children: low sample sizes in Scotland (31,32,33,35,55,(68)(69)(70)74) , lack of adjustment for confounders (22)(23)(24)(26)(27)(28)(31)(32)(33)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)68,69,(71)(72)(73)(74)76) and limited statistical analysis (6,7,(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)…”

Section: Study Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying dietary differences between Scotland and England: a rapid review of the literature

Chambers

Barton

Albani

et al. 2017

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Rates of premature mortality have been higher in Scotland than in England since the 1970s. Given the known association of diet with chronic disease, the study objective was to identify and synthesise evidence on current and historical differences in food and nutrient intakes in Scotland and England. Design: A rapid review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was carried out. After an initial scoping search, Medline, CINAHL, Embase and Web of Science were searched. Relevant grey literature was also included. Inclusion criteria were: any date; measures of dietary intake; representative populations; cross-sectional or observational cohort studies; and English-language publications. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Crosssectional Studies. A narrative synthesis of extracted information was conducted. Results: Fifty publications and reports were included in the review. Results indicated that children and adults in Scotland had lower intakes of vegetables and vitamins compared with those living in England. Higher intakes of salt in Scotland were also identified. Data were limited by small Scottish samples, difficulty in finding Englandlevel data, lack of statistical testing and adjustment for key confounders. Conclusions: Further investigation of adequately powered and analysed surveys is required to examine more fully dietary differences between Scotland and England. This would provide greater insight into potential causes of excess mortality in Scotland compared with England and suitable policy recommendations to address these inequalities.

show abstract

A taxonomy of rapid reviews links report types and methods to specific decision-making contexts

Abstract: Rapid products have tremendous methodological variation; categorization based on time frame or type of synthesis reveals patterns. The similarity across rapid products lies in the close relationship with the end user to meet time-sensitive decision-making needs.

Cited by 71 publications

References 12 publications

Grey literature in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of the contribution of non-English reports, unpublished studies and dissertations to the results of meta-analyses in child-relevant reviews

Grey literature in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of the contribution of non-English reports, unpublished studies and dissertations to the results of meta-analyses in child-relevant reviews

A Framework for Conceptualizing Evidence Needs of Health Systems

Identifying dietary differences between Scotland and England: a rapid review of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About