Criteria for commissioning a de-novo Cochrane rapid review (RR):

• Valid rationale for doing a RR:
  • Need for urgent decision-making.
  • Focus on new or emerging technologies, therapies, or diagnostic tests.
  • Topic originates from a rapidly evolving field.
  • Scenario is characterized by limited resources, typically in low-income countries.

• A commissioning agency supports the RR and contributes as a knowledge user in the planning of the review.
• Existing track record of authors in conducting evidence syntheses.
• Clear commitment from the authors to dedicate appropriate time to the project.
• Special case: RR is a precursor of a Cochrane review on a highly relevant topic.
• Where review teams are contemplating an update of an existing rapid review, careful consideration should be given to whether the review should be updated with the same scope and methodological approach. Revisiting the research question(s) as a systematic review may be a better option. 

Criteria for considering an external RR for publication in the Cochrane Library:

• Valid rationale for doing a RR:
  • Need for urgent decision-making.
  • Focus on new or emerging technologies, therapies, or diagnostic tests.
  • Topic originates from a rapidly evolving field

•  The review is based on an a priori publicly available RR protocol (to avoid repackaged flawed systematic reviews).
• Search is not older than 6 months at time of submission (but should get updated if older than 6 months at time of publication).
• Compliance with Cochrane RR guidelines.