2022-03-04Zeitschriftenartikel
Methodological guidance for rapid reviews in healthcare: A scoping review
dc.contributor.author | Speckemeier, Christian | |
dc.contributor.author | Niemann, Anja | |
dc.contributor.author | Wasem, Jürgen | |
dc.contributor.author | Buchberger, Barbara | |
dc.contributor.author | Neusser, Silke | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-09-02T15:23:34Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-09-02T15:23:34Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022-03-04 | none |
dc.identifier.other | 10.1002/jrsm.1555 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://edoc.rki.de/176904/12068 | |
dc.description.abstract | The aim of the present work was to identify published methodological guidance for rapid reviews (RRs) and to analyze the recommendations with regard to time-saving measures. A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE in November 2020. In addition, a search based on Google Scholar and websites of governmental and non-governmental organizations was conducted. Literature screening was carried out by two researchers independently. A total of 34 publications were included. These describe 38 distinct RR types. The timeframe to complete the identified RR types ranges from 24 h to 6 months (mean time 2.2 months). For most RR types a specific research question (n = 21) and a prioritizing search (n = 25; preference for e.g., systematic reviews and meta-analyses) is employed. Different approaches such as reduced personnel in literature screening (n = 21) and data extraction (n = 21) are recommended. The majority of RR types include a bias assessment (n = 28) and suggest a narrative report focusing on safety and efficacy. The included RR types are heterogeneous in terms of completion time, considered domains and strategies to alter the standard systematic review methods. A rationale for the recommended shortcuts is rarely presented. | eng |
dc.language.iso | eng | none |
dc.publisher | Robert Koch-Institut | |
dc.rights | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 DE) Namensnennung - Nicht-kommerziell - Keine Bearbeitung 3.0 Deutschland | ger |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/de/ | |
dc.subject | evidence synthesis | eng |
dc.subject | guideline | eng |
dc.subject | methodology | eng |
dc.subject | rapid review | eng |
dc.subject | recommendations | eng |
dc.subject | scoping review | eng |
dc.subject.ddc | 610 Medizin und Gesundheit | none |
dc.title | Methodological guidance for rapid reviews in healthcare: A scoping review | none |
dc.type | article | |
dc.identifier.urn | urn:nbn:de:0257-176904/12068-9 | |
dc.type.version | publishedVersion | none |
local.edoc.container-title | Research Synthesis Methods | none |
local.edoc.container-issn | 1759-2887 | none |
local.edoc.pages | 11 | none |
local.edoc.type-name | Zeitschriftenartikel | |
local.edoc.container-type | periodical | |
local.edoc.container-type-name | Zeitschrift | |
local.edoc.container-url | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/17592887 | none |
local.edoc.container-publisher-name | John Wiley & Sons, Inc | none |
local.edoc.container-volume | 13 | none |
local.edoc.container-issue | 4 | none |
local.edoc.container-reportyear | 2022 | none |
local.edoc.container-firstpage | 394 | none |
local.edoc.container-lastpage | 404 | none |
dc.description.version | Peer Reviewed | none |