Publications

Rapid Reviews - Methods Related Publications:

2024

2023

2022

  • Devane D, Burke NN, Treweek S, Clarke M, Thomas J, Booth A, Tricco AC, Saif-Ur-Rahman KM. Study within a review (SWAR). J Evid Based Med. 2022 Dec;15(4):328-332. doi: 10.1111/jebm.12505. Epub 2022 Dec 13. PMID: 36513956; PMCID: PMC10107874.
  • Beecher C, Toomey E, Maeso B, Whiting C, Stewart DC, Worrall A, Elliott J, Smith M, Tierney T, Blackwood B, Maguire T, Kampman M, Ling B, Gill C, Healy P, Houghton C, Booth A, Garritty C, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Burke NN, Keenan C, Devane D. Priority III: top 10 rapid review methodology research priorities identified using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Nov;151:151-160. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.08.002. Epub 2022 Aug 28. PMID: 36038041; PMCID: PMC9487890.
  • Sharp MK, Baki DABA, Quigley J, Tyner B, Devane D, Mahtani KR, Smith SM, O'Neill M, Ryan M, Clyne B. The effectiveness and acceptability of evidence synthesis summary formats for clinical guideline development groups: a mixed-methods systematic review. Implement Sci. 2022 Oct 27;17(1):74. doi:10.1186/s13012-022-01243-2. PMID: 36303142; PMCID: PMC9615384.
  • Affengruber, L.; Dobrescu, A.; Persad, E.; Klerings, I.; Wagner, G.; Sommer, I.; Gartlehner, G. (2022). Characteristics and recovery methods of studies falsely excluded during literature screening-a systematic review. Systematic Reviews, 11: 236 
  • King, V.J., Stevens, A., Nussbaumer-Streit, B. et al. Paper 2: Performing rapid reviews. Syst Rev 11, 151 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-02011-5
  • Ewald H, Klerings I, Wagner G, Heise TL, Stratil JM, Lhachimi SK, Hemkens LG, Gartlehner G, Armijo-Olivo S, Nussbaumer-Streit B (2022) Searching two or more databases decreased the risk of missing relevant studies: a metaresearch study, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.05.022. 
  • Noel-Storr A, Gartlehner G, Dooley G et al. (2022). Crowdsourcing the identification of studies for COVID-19-related Cochrane Rapid Reviews. Research Synthesis Methods. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1559.

2021

  • Hamel, C, Hersi, M, Kelly, S.E et al. Guidance for using artificial intelligence for title and abstract screening while conducting knowledge syntheses. BMC Med Res Methodol 21, 285 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01451-2.
  • Garritty C, Gartlehner G, Nussbaumer-Streit B, King VJ, Hamel C, Kamel C et al. Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2021; 130: 13-22.
  • Nussbaumer-Streit B, Ellen M, et al. (2020) Resource use during systematic review production varies widely: a scoping review, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.019.
  • Hamel C, Michaud A, Thuku M, Skidmore B, Stevens A, Nussbaumer-Streit B et al. Defining rapid reviews: a systematic scoping review and thematic analysis of definitions and defining characteristics of rapid reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2021; 129: 74-85.
  • Dobrescu AI, Nussbaumer-Streit B, et al. (2021) Restricting evidence syntheses of interventions to English-language publications is a viable methodological shortcut for most medical topics: a systematic review, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Volume 137,Pages 209-217, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.04.012.
  • Noel-Storr A, Dooley G, Affengruber L, Gartlehner G, Citation screening using crowdsourcing and machine learning produced accurate results: Evaluation of Cochrane's modified Screen4Me service, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Volume 130, 2021, Pages 23-31, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.09.024.
  • Seidler A, Nussbaumer-Streit B, et al. (2021) Rapid Reviews in the Time of COVID-19 – Experiences of the Competence Network Public Health COVID-19 and Proposal for a Standardized Procedure [Rapid Reviews in Zeiten von COVID-19 – Erfahrungen im Zuge des Kompetenznetzes Public Health zu COVID-19 und Vorschlag eines standardisierten Vorgehens], Das Gesundheitswesen. 2021; 83(03): 173-179 DOI: 10.1055/a-1380-0926
  • Speckemeier C, Krabbe L, Schwenke S, Wasem J, Buchberger B, Neusser S. Discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews. Systematic Reviews 2021; 10(1): 121.
  • Qaseem A, Yost J, Forciea MA, Jokela JA, Miller MC, Obley A et al. The Development of Living, Rapid Practice Points: Summary of Methods From the Scientific Medical Policy Committee of the American College of Physicians. Annals of internal medicine 2021; 174(8): 1126-1132.

2020

  • Garritty, C., M. Hersi, et al. (2020). "Assessing the format and content of journal published and non-journal published rapid review reports: A comparative study." PLOS ONE 15(8): e0238025.
  • Affengruber, L., Wagner, G., Waffenschmidt, S. et al. Combining abbreviated literature searches with single-reviewer screening: three case studies of rapid reviews. Syst Rev 9, 162 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01413-7
  • Garritty C, Gartlehner G, et al (2020). Rapid review methods guidance aids in Cochrane’s quick response to the COVID-19 crisis. In: Collaborating in response to COVID-19: editorial and methods initiatives across Cochrane. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2020;(12 Suppl 1):28-29. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD202002. 
  • Arevalo-Rodriguez I, Tricco AC, et al. (2020) Developing rapid reviews of diagnostic tests in the time of COVID-19: current knowledge and future steps. In: Collaborating in response to COVID-19: editorial and methods initiatives across Cochrane. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2020;(12 Suppl 1):[32-33]. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD202002.
  • Gartlehner G, Nussbaumer-Streit B. (2020) Learning from emergency trauma teams: an organizational approach for conducting (very) rapid reviews. In: Collaborating in response to COVID-19: editorial and methods initiatives across Cochrane. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2020;(12 Suppl 1):[41-42]. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD202002.
  • Tricco, A. C., C. M. Garritty, et al. (2020). "Rapid review methods more challenging during COVID-19: commentary with a focus on 8 knowledge synthesis steps." Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 126: 177-183.
  • Ewald, H., I. Klerings, et al. (2020). "Abbreviated and comprehensive literature searches led to identical or very similar effect estimates: a meta-epidemiological study." J Clin Epidemiol 128: 1-12.
  • Garritty, C., C. Hamel, et al. (2020). "Assessing how information is packaged in rapid reviews for policy-makers and other stakeholders: a cross-sectional study." Health Research Policy and Systems 18(1): 112.
  • Arevalo-Rodriguez, I., K. R. Steingart, et al. (2020). "Current methods for development of rapid reviews about diagnostic tests: an international survey."  20: 1-7.
  • Hamel, C., A. Michaud, et al. (2020). "Few evaluative studies exist examining rapid review methodology across stages of conduct: a systematic scoping review."
  • Tsou, A. Y., J. R. Treadwell, et al. (2020). "Machine learning for screening prioritization in systematic reviews: comparative performance of Abstrackr and EPPI-Reviewer." Syst Rev 9(1): 73.
  • Gartlehner, G., et al., Single-reviewer abstract screening missed 13 percent of relevant studies: a crowd-based, randomized controlled trial. 2020. 121: p. 20-28.
  • Nussbaumer-Streit B, Klerings I, Gartlehner G. Reply to letter to the editor "Lessons from COVID-19 to future evidence synthesis efforts: first living search strategy and out of date scientific publishing and indexing industry". J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;123:173-174. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.04.013
  • Nussbaumer-Streit, B., I. Klerings, et al. (2020). "Excluding non-English publications from evidence-syntheses did not change conclusions: a meta-epidemiological study." J Clin Epidemiol.
  • Garritty C, Gartlehner G, et al. (2020) Cochrane Rapid Reviews. Interim Guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. March 2020.  https://methods.cochrane.org/rapidreviews/cochrane-rr-methods.
  • Akl EA, Morgan RL, et al. (2020) Developing trustworthy recommendations as part of an urgent response (1-2 weeks): a GRADE concept paper. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 129:1-11, 2020 Sep 30. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.09.037 
  • Clark, J., et al., A full systematic review was completed in 2 weeks using automation tools: a case study. J Clin Epidemiol, 2020. 121: p. 81-90.
  • Armijo-Olivo, S., R. Craig, and S. Campbell, Comparing machine and human reviewers to evaluate the risk of bias in randomized controlled trials. Research Synthesis Methods, 2020. n/a(n/a).
  • Harrison, H., S. J. Griffin, et al. (2020). "Software tools to support title and abstract screening for systematic reviews in healthcare: an evaluation." BMC Medical Research Methodology 20(1): 7.

2019

  • Arevalo-Rodriguez, I., P. Moreno-Nunez, et al. (2019). "Rapid reviews of medical tests used many similar methods to systematic reviews but key items were rarely reported: a scoping review."  116: 98-105.
  • Jackson, J.L., et al., The Accuracy of Google Translate for Abstracting Data From Non–English-Language Trials for Systematic Reviews. 2019.
  • Martin, P., D. Surian, et al. (2019). "Trial2rev: Combining machine learning and crowd-sourcing to create a shared space for updating systematic reviews." JAMIA Open 2(1): 15-22.
  • Brassey, J., C. Price, et al. (2019). "Developing a fully automated evidence synthesis tool for identifying, assessing and collating the evidence." BMJ Evid Based Med.
  • Li, T., I. J. Saldanha, et al. (2019). "A randomized trial provided new evidence on the accuracy and efficiency of traditional vs. electronically annotated abstraction approaches in systematic reviews." J Clin Epidemiol 115: 77-89.
  • Marshall, I. J., R. Marshall, et al. (2019). "Rapid reviews may produce different results to systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study."  109: 30-41.
  • Gartlehner, G., G. Wagner, et al. (2019). "Assessing the accuracy of machine-assisted abstract screening with DistillerAI: a user study." Syst Rev 8(1): 277.
  • Bannach-Brown, A., P. Przybyla, et al. (2019). "Machine learning algorithms for systematic review: reducing workload in a preclinical review of animal studies and reducing human screening error." Syst Rev 8(1): 23.
  • Gates, A., S. Guitard, et al. (2019). "Performance and usability of machine learning for screening in systematic reviews: a comparative evaluation of three tools." Syst Rev 8(1): 278.
  • Waffenschmidt, S., M. Knelangen, et al. (2019). "Single screening versus conventional double screening for study selection in systematic reviews: a methodological systematic review." BMC Med Res Methodol 19(1): 132.
  • Marshall, I. J. and B. C. Wallace (2019). "Toward systematic review automation: a practical guide to using machine learning tools in research synthesis." Syst Rev 8(1): 163.
  • Langlois EV, Straus SE, et al. (2019) Using rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems and progress towards universal health coverage. BMJ Glob Health 2019;4:e001178. https://gh.bmj.com/content/bmjgh/4/1/e001178.full.pdf 
  • Stoll, C. R. T., S. Izadi, et al. (2019). "The value of a second reviewer for study selection in systematic reviews." Res Synth Methods.
  • O'Connor, A. M., G. Tsafnat, et al. (2019). "A question of trust: can we build an evidence base to gain trust in systematic review automation technologies?" Syst Rev 8(1): 143.

2018

  • Ranard, B. L., Y. P. Ha, et al. (2014). "Crowdsourcing--harnessing the masses to advance health and medicine, a systematic review." J Gen Intern Med 29(1): 187-203.
  • Crequit, P., G. Mansouri, et al. (2018). "Mapping of Crowdsourcing in Health: Systematic Review." J Med Internet Res 20(5): e187.
  • Gates, A., B. Vandermeer, et al. (2018). "Technology-assisted risk of bias assessment in systematic reviews: a prospective cross-sectional evaluation of the RobotReviewer machine learning tool." J Clin Epidemiol 96: 54-62.
  • Aliyu, M. B., R. Iqbal, et al. (2018). The canonical model of structure for data extraction in systematic reviews of scientific research articles. 2018 Fifth International Conference on Social Networks Analysis, Management and Security (SNAMS), IEEE.
  • Nussbaumer-Streit B, Klerings I, Wagner G, Heise TL, Dobrescu AI, Armijo-Olivo S, Stratil JM, Persad E, Lhachimi SK, Van Noord MG, Mittermayr T, Zeeb H, Hemkens L, Gartlehner G. Abbreviated literature searches were viable to alternatives to comprehensive searches: a meta-epidemiological study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2018;102:1-11.
  • Reynen E, Robson R, Ivory J, Hwee J, Straus SE, Pham B, Tricco AC. A retrospective comparison of systematic reviews with same-topic rapid reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2018;96:23-34.
  • Plüddemann A, Aronson JK, Onakpoya I, Heneghan C, Mahtani KR. Redefining rapid reviews: a flexible framework for restricted systematic reviews. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine Epub ahead of print: 27 June 2018. doi: 10.1136/bmjemb-2018-110990.
  • Spry, C. and M. Mierzwinski-Urban (2018). "The impact of the peer review of literature search strategies in support of rapid review reports." Res Synth Methods 9(4): 521-526.
  • Aronson JK, Heneghan C, Mahtani KR, Plüddemann A. A word about evidence: ‘rapid reviews’ or ‘restricted reviews’? BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine Epub ahead of print: 29 June 2018. doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111025.
  • Tolentino Silva M, Nunes da Silva E, Otavio Maia Barreto J. Rapid response in health technology assessment: a Delphi study for a Brazilian guideline. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2018;18:51.
  • Patnode CD, Eder ML, Walsh ES, Viswanathan M, Lin JS. The use of rapid review methods for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2018;54(1S1):S19-25.
  • Tricco AC, Zarin W, Ghassemi M, Nincic V, Lillie E, Page MJ, Shamseer L, Antony J, Rios P, Hwee J, Veroniki AA, Moher D, Hartling L, Pham B, Straus SE. Same family, different species: methodological conduct and quality varies according to purpose for five types of knowledge synthesis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2018;96:133-142.
  • Tricco AC, Zarin W, Rios P, Nincic V, Khan PA, Ghassemi M, Diaz S, Pham B, Straus SE, Langlois EV. Engaging policy-makers, heath system managers, and policy analysts in the knowledge synthesis process: a scoping review. Implement Sci. 2018 Feb 12;13(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0717-x. PubMed PMID: 29433543; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5809959.
  • Moore G, Redman S, Rudge S, Haynes A. Do policy-makers find commissioned rapid reviews useful? Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Feb 26;16(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0293-1. PubMed PMID: 29482643; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5828139.

2017

  • Tricco AC, Langlois EV, Straus SE, editors. Rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems: a practical guide. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/resources/publications/rapid-review-guide/en/
  • Dobbins, Maureen. Rapid Review Guidebook. Steps for Conducting a Rapid Review. National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. http://www.nccmt.ca/uploads/media/media/0001/01/a816af720e4d587e13da6bb307df8c907a5dff9a.pdf 
  • Wagner G, Nussbaumer-Streit B, Greimel J, Ciapponi A, Gartlehner G. Trading certainty for speed - how much uncertainty are decisionmakers and guideline developers willing to accept when using rapid reviews: an international survey. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Aug          14;17(1):121. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0406-5. PMID: 28806999
  • Taylor-Phillips S, Geppert J, Stinton C, Freeman K, Johnson S, Librarian AS, Fraser H, Sutcliffe P, Clarke A. Comparison of a full systematic review versus a rapid review approaches to assess a newborn screening test for tyrosinemia type 1. Res Synth Methods. 2017 Jul 13. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1255. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 28703492
  • Mijumbi-Deve R, Rosenbaum SE, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Sewankambo NK. Policymaker experiences with rapid response briefs to address health-system and technology questions in Uganda. Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 May 3;15(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s12961-017-0200-1.
  • O'Leary DF, Casey M, O'Connor L, Stokes D, Fealy GM, O'Brien D, Smith R, McNamara MS, Egan C. Using rapid reviews: an example from a study conducted to inform policy-making. J Adv Nurs. 2017 Mar;73(3):742-752. doi: 10.1111/jan.13231.
  • Lawani MA, Valéra B, Fortier-Brochu É, Légaré F, Carmichael PH, Côté L, Voyer P, Kröger E, Witteman H, Rodriguez C, Giguere AM. Five shared decision-making tools in 5 months: use of rapid reviews to develop decision boxes for seniors living with dementia and their caregivers. Syst Rev. 2017 Mar 15;6(1):56. doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0446-2.
  • Hartling L, Guise JM, Hempel S, Featherstone R, Mitchell MD, Motu'apuaka ML. Robinson KA, Schoelles K, Totten A, Whitlock E, Wilt TJ, Anderson J, Berliner E, Gozu A, Kato E, Paynter R, Umscheid CA. Fit for purpose: perspectives on rapid reviews from end-user interviews. Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 17;6(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0425-7. PubMed PMID: 28212677; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5316162.
  • Garritty CM, Norris SL, Moher D. Developing WHO rapid advice guidelines in the setting of a public health emergency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Feb; 82:47-60. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.08.010. Epub 2016 Aug 31. PMID: 27591906
  • Abou-Setta AM, Jeyaraman MM, Attia A, Al-Inany HG, Ferri M, Ansari MT, Garritty CM, Bond K, Norris SL. Methods for Developing Evidence Reviews in Short Periods of Time: A Scoping Review. PLoS One. 2016 Dec 8;11(12):e0165903. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165903. eCollection 2016. Review. Erratum in: PLoS One. 2017 Feb 13;12 (2):e0172372.
  • Moore G, Redman S, D'Este C, Makkar S, Turner T. Does knowledge brokering improve the quality of rapid review proposals? A before and after study. Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 28;6(1):23. doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0411-0. PMID: 28129795
  • Mansilla C, Herrera C, Basagoitia A, Pantoja T. Rev The Evidence-Informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) in Chile: lessons learned from a year of coordinated efforts. Panam Salud Publica. 2017;41:e36.
  • Murphy A et al. Rapid reviews with health-technology assessments in reimbursement systems – an examination of Ireland as a case study. Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment. Vol. 4, Issue 1 – 2017.

2016

  • Engelbert M.  Rapid Evidence Maps as Decision Tools for Evidence-based Policy. (2016). Capstone Collection. Paper 2942
  • Nussbaumer-Streit B, Klerings I, Wagner G, Titscher V, Gartlehner G. Assessing the validity of abbreviated literature searches for rapid reviews: protocol of a non-inferiority and meta-epidemiologic study. Systematic Reviews. 2016;5:197. Available:https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-016-0380-8.
  • Garritty C, Stevens A, Gartlehner G, King V, Kamel C. Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group to play a leading role in guiding the production of informed high-quality, timely research evidence syntheses. Systematic Reviews 2016;5:184. Available:http://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-016-0360-z.
  • Haby MM, Chapman E, Clark R, Barreto J, Reveiz L, Lavis JN. What are the best methodologies for rapid reviews of the research evidence for evidence-informed decision making in health policy and practice: a rapid review. Health Res Policy Syst 2016;14(1):83. Available:https://health-policy-systems.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12961-016-0155-7.
  • Haby MM, Chapman E, Clark R, Barreto J, Reveiz L, Lavis JN. Designing a rapid response program to support evience-informed decision-making in the Americas region: using the best available evidence and case studies. Impl Sci 2016;11:117. Available:https://implementationscience.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13012-016-0472-9
  • Kelly SE, Moher D, Clifford TJ. Expediting evidence synthesis for healthcare decision-making: exploring attitudes and perceptions towards rapid reviews using Q methodology. Available: https://peerj.com/articles/2522/
  • Kelly SE, Moher D, Clifford TJ. Defining rapid reviews : a modified delphi consensus approach. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2016;32:4
  • Mattivi JT, Buchberger B. Using the AMSTAR checklist for rapid reviews: is it feasible? Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2016;32:4.
  • Hartling L, Guise JM, Hempel S, Featherstone R, Mitchell MD, Motu’apuaka ML, Robinson KA, Schoelles K, Totten A, Whitlock E, Wilt T, Anderson J, Berliner E, Gozu A, Kato E,Paynter R, Umscheid CA. EPC Methods: AHRQ End User Perspectives of Rapid Reviews. Research White Paper. (Prepared by the Scientific Resource Center under Contract No. 290-2012-00004-C.) AHRQ Publication No.16-EHC014-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; April 2016. www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm.
  • Hite J and Gluck ME. “Rapid Evidence Reviews for Health Policy and Practice,” AcademyHealth, January 2016. [Accessed March 2016] https://www.academyhealth.org/files/publications/AH_Rapid%20Evidence%20Reviews%20Brief.pdf
  • Kelly SE, Moher D, Clifford TJ. Quality of conduct and reporting in rapid reviews: an exploration of compliance with PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines. Systematic Reviews 2016 5:79; DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0258-9.
  • Tricco AC, Zarin W, Antony J, Hutton B, Moher D, Sherifali D, Straus S. An international survey and modified Delphi approach revealed numerous rapid review methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2016 Feb Vol 70; 61-67. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.012

2015

  • Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH). Rapid review summit: then, now and in the future. 3–4 February 2015. CADTH Summit Series. CADTH: Vancouver, BC; 2015. http://​www.​cadth.​ca/​cadth-summit-series.
  • Featherstone RM, Dryden DM, Foisy M, Guise JM, et al. Advancing knowledge of rapid reviews: an analysis of results, conclusions and recommendations from published review articles examining rapid reviews. Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 17;4(1):50. doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0040-4.
  • Haby M, C.E., Reveiz L, Barreto J, Clark R, . Methodologies for rapid response for evidence informed decision making in health policy and practice: an overview of systematic reviews and primary studies (Protocol) 2015; Available from: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42015015998
  • Hartling L, Guise JM, Kato E, Anderson J, Berliner E, Dryden DM, Featherstone R, Mitchell MD, Motu’apuaka M, Noorani H, Paynter R, Robinson K, Schoelles K, Umscheid CA, Whitlock E. Taxonomy of rapid reviews links report types and methods to specific decision-making contexts. Journal of Clin Epidemiol. 2015 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.05.036
  • Hartling L, Guidse J-M, Kato E, Anderson J, Arsonson N, Belinson S et al. EPC Methods: An Exploration of Methods and Contexts for the Production of Rapid Reviews. Research White Paper. AHRQ Publication No. 15-EHC008-EF. 2015. Rockville, MD, US, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) - Scientific Resource Center under Contract No. 290-2012-00004-C.
  • Hayden JA, Killian L, Zygmunt A, Babineau J, Martin-Misener R, Jensen JL, Carter AJ. Methods of a multi-faceted rapid knowledge synthesis project to inform the implementation of a new health service model: Collaborative Emergency Centres. Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 14;4:7. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-7.
  • Hersi M, Stevens A, Quach P, Hamel C, Thavorn K, Garritty C, Skidmore B, Vallenas C, Norris   SL, Egger M, Eremin S, Ferri M, Shindo N, Moher D. Effectiveness of Personal Protective Equipment for Healthcare Workers Caring for Patients with Filovirus Disease: A Rapid Review. PLoS. 2015 Oct 9; DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.014029.
  • Jayakumar KL, Lavenberg JA, Mitchell MD, Doshi JA, Leas B, Goldmann DR, Williams K, Brennan PJ, Umscheid CA. Evidence synthesis activities of a hospital evidence-based practice center and impact on hospital decision making. J Hosp Med. 2016 Mar;11(3):185-92. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2498. Epub 2015 Oct 27.
  • Kelly, Shannon E. Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the M.Sc. degree in Epidemiology School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine Faculty of Medicine University of Ottawa © Shannon E. Kelly, Ottawa, Canada, 2015) [Accessed January 2016] https://www.ruor.uottawa.ca/bitstream/10393/33021/3/Kelly_Shannon_2015_Thesis.pdf
  • Moher D, Stewart L, Shekelle P. All in the Family: systematic reviews, rapid reviews, scoping reviews, realist reviews, and more. Systematic Reviews. 2015;4:183. doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0163-7.
  • Polisena J, Garritty C, Umscheid CA,  Kamel C, Samra K, Smith J, and Vosilla A. Rapid Review Summit: an overview and initiation of a research agenda. Syst Rev. 2015; 4: 111. doi:  10.1186/s13643-015-0111-6
  • Polisena J, Garritty C, Kamel C, Stevens A, et al. Rapid review programs to support health care and policy decision making: a descriptive analysis of processes and methods. Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 14;4(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0022-6.
  • Schunemann HJ, Moja L. Reviews: rapid! rapid! rapid! …and systematic. Syst Rev. 2015;4:4. doi:10.​1186/​2046-4053-4-4.
  • Tricco AC, Antony J, Zarin W, Strifler L, Ghassemi M, Ivory J, Perrier L, Hutton B, Moher D, Straus SE. A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Medicine. 2015;13:224. Doi 10.1186/s 12916-015-0465-6.
  • Tsertsvadze A, Chen YF, Moher D, Sutcliffe P, McCarthy N. How to conduct systematic reviews more expeditiously? Syst Rev. 2015 Nov 12;4:160. doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0147-7.
  • Varker T, Forbes D, Dell L, Weston A, Merlin T, Hodson S, O'Donnell M. Rapid evidence assessment: increasing the transparency of an emerging methodology. J Eval Clin Pract. 2015 Dec;21(6):1199-204. doi: 10.1111/jep.12405.
  • Wilson MG, Lavis JN, Gauvin FP. Developing a rapid-response program for health system decision-makers in Canada: findings from an issue brief and stakeholder dialogue. Syst Rev. 2015;4:25. doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0009-3.

2014

  • Khangura S, Polisena J, Clifford TJ, Farrah K, Kamel C. Rapid review: an emerging approach to evidence synthesis in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014; 30(1):20-27.
  • Merlin T, Tamblyn D, Ellery B; INAHTA Quality Assurance Group. What's in a name? Developing definitions for common health technology assessment product types of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (inahta).Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014 Oct;30(4):430-7. doi: 10.1017/S0266462314000543. 
  • WHO. WHO Handbook for Guideline Development. 2nd Edition. Chapter 11. Rapid advice guidelines in the setting of a public health emergency (Garritty C, Norris SL, Moher D). 133-156. 2014. Geneva, Switzerland, WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.
  • World Health Organization. Hand hygiene in health care in the context of Filovirus disease outbreak response. Rapid advice guideline (2014). http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/ebola/hand-hygiene/en/ [Accessed Marc 2016]
  • World Health Organization. Personal protective equipment in the context of filovirus disease outbreak response: Rapid advice guideline (2014). http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/ebola/ppe-guideline/en/ [Accessed March 2016]

2013

  • Thomas J, Newman M, Oliver S. Rapid evidence assessments of research to inform social policy: taking stock and moving forward. Evid Policy. 2013;9:5–27. doi:10.​1332/​174426413X662572.

2012

  • Harker J, Kleijnen J. What is a rapid review? A methodological exploration of rapid reviews in Health Technology Assessments. Int J Evid-Based Healthc. 2012;10(4):397–410. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2012.00290. 
  • Khangura S, Konnyu K, Cushman R, Grimshaw J, Moher D. Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Syst Rev. 2012;1(1):10. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-10.

2011

  • Civil Service. What is a rapid evidence assessment? London: Civil Service (2011); http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140305122816/http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/networks/gsr/resources-and-guidance/rapid-evidence-assessment
  • Rosenbaum SE, Glenton C, Wiysonge CS, Abalos E, Mignini L, Young T, Althabe F, Ciapponi A, Marti SG, Meng Q, et al. Evidence summaries tailored to health policy-makers in low- and middle-income countries. Bull World Health Organ. 2011 Jan 1; 89(1):54-61.
  • Van de Velde S, De Buck E, Dieltjens T, Aertgeerts B. Medicinal use of potato-derived products: conclusions of a rapid versus full systematic review. Phytother Res. 2011;25:787–8. doi:10.​1002/​ptr.​3356.

2010

  • Abrami PC, Borokhovski E, Bernard RM, Wade CA, Tamim R, Persson T, et al. Issues in conducting and disseminating brief reviews of evidence. Evid Policy. 2010;6:371–89. doi:10.​1332/​174426410X524866​.
  • Bambra C, Joyce KE, Bellis MA, Greatley A, Greengross S, Hughes S et al. Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy. J Public Health (Oxf). 2010; 32(4):496-505.
  • Ganann R, Ciliska D, Thomas H. Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implement Sci. 2010;5(1):56. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-56.  

2009

  • Armitage A, Keeble-Ramsay D. The rapid structured literature review as a research strategy. US-China Education Review. 2009;6:27–38.
  • Hailey D. A preliminary survey on the influence of rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25(3):415–418. doi:10.​1017/​S026646230999006​7.

2008

  • Watt A, Cameron A, Sturm L, Lathlean T, et al. Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: an inventory of current methods and practice in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24(2):133–9. doi: 10.1017/S0266462308080185.  
  • Watt A, Cameron A, Sturm L, Lathlean T, Babidge W, Blamey S, et al. Rapid versus full systematic reviews: validity in clinical practice? ANZ J Surg. 2008;78:1037–40. doi:10.​1111/​j.​1445-2197.​2008.​04730.​x.

2007

  • Cameron A, Watt A, Lathlean T, Sturm T. Rapid versus full systematic reviews: an inventory of current methods and practice in Health Technology Assessment. ASERNIP-S report number 60. Adelaide: Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures – Surgical (ASERNIP-S); 2007. http://​www.​surgeons.​org/​media/​297941/​rapidvsfull2007_​systematicreview​.​pdf.

2006

  • Hailey D. Health technology assessment. Singapore Med J. 2006;47:187–92. 

2002

  • Corabian P, Harstall C. Rapid assessments provide acceptable quality advice. Annu Meet Int Soc Technol Assess Health Care Int Soc Technol Assess Health Care Meet. 2002;18:Abstract 70.

2000

  • Hailey D, Corabian P, Harstall C, Schneider W. The use and impact of rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:651–6.

1997

  • Best L, Stevens A, Colin‐Jones D. Rapid and responsive health technology assessment: the development and evaluation process in the South and West region of England. J Clin Effec. 1997;2:51–6.2000