Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 41
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Pita, Cristina Pierce, Graham J. Theodossiou, Ioannis and Macpherson, Karen 2011. An overview of commercial fishers’ attitudes towards marine protected areas. Hydrobiologia, Vol. 670, Issue. 1, p. 289.


    Hailey, David 2009. A preliminary survey on the influence of rapid health technology assessments. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 25, Issue. 03, p. 415.


    Ganann, Rebecca Ciliska, Donna and Thomas, Helen 2010. Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implementation Science, Vol. 5, Issue. 1,


    Kirisits, Andreas and Redekop, W. Ken 2013. The Economic Evaluation of Medical Devices. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Vol. 11, Issue. 1, p. 15.


    Hammond, Julia and Seekins, Tom 2014. Environmental Contexts and Disability.


    Hailey, David 2009. Development of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 25, Issue. S1, p. 24.


    Booth, Andrew 2010. How much searching is enough? Comprehensive versus optimal retrieval for technology assessments. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 26, Issue. 04, p. 431.


    Thavaneswaran, Prema and Maddern, Guy J. 2009. Maximizing health outcomes from government investment in surgical interventions. ANZ Journal of Surgery, Vol. 80, Issue. 5, p. 308.


    Thomas, James McNaught, John and Ananiadou, Sophia 2011. Applications of text mining within systematic reviews. Research Synthesis Methods, Vol. 2, Issue. 1, p. 1.


    Van de Velde, Stijn De Buck, Emmy Dieltjens, Tessa and Aertgeerts, Bert 2011. Medicinal use of potato-derived products: conclusions of a rapid versus full systematic review. Phytotherapy Research, Vol. 25, Issue. 5, p. 787.


    Tsertsvadze, Alexander Chen, Yen-Fu Moher, David Sutcliffe, Paul and McCarthy, Noel 2015. How to conduct systematic reviews more expeditiously?. Systematic Reviews, Vol. 4, Issue. 1,


    Toomey, Elaine Currie-Murphy, Laura Matthews, James and Hurley, Deirdre A. 2015. The effectiveness of physiotherapist-delivered group education and exercise interventions to promote self-management for people with osteoarthritis and chronic low back pain: A rapid review Part I. Manual Therapy, Vol. 20, Issue. 2, p. 265.


    Merlin, Tracy Tamblyn, David and Ellery, Benjamin 2014. 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). International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 30, Issue. 04, p. 430.


    Welch, Vivian A. Nickerson, Jason W. Shea, Beverley J. Ghogomu, Elizabeth and Walker, Peter 2015. Patient-centered rapid reviews will drive local decision making: commentary on Hartling et al.. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 68, Issue. 12, p. 1526.


    Watt, Amber Cameron, Alun Sturm, Lana Lathlean, Timothy Babidge, Wendy Blamey, Stephen Facey, Karen Hailey, David Norderhaug, Inger and Maddern, Guy 2008. RAPID VERSUS FULL SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS: VALIDITY IN CLINICAL PRACTICE?. ANZ Journal of Surgery, Vol. 78, Issue. 11, p. 1037.


    Brownson, Ross C. Allen, Peg Duggan, Kathleen Stamatakis, Katherine A. and Erwin, Paul C. 2012. Fostering More-Effective Public Health by Identifying Administrative Evidence-Based Practices. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 43, Issue. 3, p. 309.


    Mathew, Joseph L. 2011. KNOW ESSENTIALS: A tool for informed decisions in the absence of formal HTA systems. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 27, Issue. 02, p. 139.


    Tonmukayakul, Utsana Velasco, Román Pérez Tantivess, Sripen and Teerawattananon, Yot 2012. Lessons drawn from research utilization in the maternal iodine supplementation policy development in Thailand. BMC Public Health, Vol. 12, Issue. 1,


    Palomaki, Glenn E. Melillo, Stephanie Neveux, Louis Douglas, Michael P. Dotson, W. David Janssens, A. Cecile J. W. Balkite, Elizabeth A. and Bradley, Linda A. 2010. Use of genomic profiling to assess risk for cardiovascular disease and identify individualized prevention strategies—A targeted evidence-based review. Genetics in Medicine, Vol. 12, Issue. 12, p. 772.


    Varker, Tracey Forbes, David Dell, Lisa Weston, Adele Merlin, Tracy Hodson, Stephanie and O'Donnell, Meaghan 2015. Rapid evidence assessment: increasing the transparency of an emerging methodology. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 21, Issue. 6, p. 1199.


    ×
  • International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Volume 24, Issue 2
  • April 2008, pp. 133-139

Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: An inventory of current methods and practice in health technology assessment

  • Amber Watt (a1), Alun Cameron (a1), Lana Sturm (a1), Timothy Lathlean (a1), Wendy Babidge (a1), Stephen Blamey (a2), Karen Facey (a3), David Hailey (a4), Inger Norderhaug (a5) and Guy Maddern (a6)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462308080185
  • Published online: 01 April 2008
Abstract

Objectives: This review assessed current practice in the preparation of rapid reviews by health technology assessment (HTA) organizations, both internationally and in the Australian context, and evaluated the available peer-reviewed literature pertaining to the methodology used in the preparation of these reviews.

Methods: A survey tool was developed and distributed to a total of fifty International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) members and other selected HTA organizations. Data on a broad range of themes related to the conduct of rapid reviews were collated, discussed narratively, and subjected to simple statistical analysis where appropriate. Systematic searches of the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Australian Medical Index were undertaken in March 2007 to identify literature pertaining to rapid review methodology. Comparative studies, guidelines, program evaluations, methods studies, commentaries, and surveys were considered for inclusion.

Results: Twenty-three surveys were returned (46 percent), with eighteen agencies reporting on thirty-six rapid review products. Axiomatic trends were identified, but there was little cohesion between organizations regarding the contents, methods, and definition of a rapid review. The twelve studies identified by the systematic literature search did not specifically address the methodology underpinning rapid review; rather, many highlighted the complexity of the area. Authors suggested restricted research questions and truncated search strategies as methods to limit the time taken to complete a review.

Conclusions: Rather than developing a formalized methodology by which to conduct rapid reviews, agencies should work toward increasing the transparency of the methods used for each review. It is perhaps the appropriate use, not the appropriate methodology, of a rapid review that requires future consideration.

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

2.L Best , A Stevens , D Colin-Jones . Rapid and responsive health technology assessment: The development and evaluation process in the South and West region of England. J Clinic Effectiv. 1997;2:5156.

7.D Hailey , P Corabian , C Harstall , W Schneider . The use and impact of rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:651656.

12.A Stevens , R Milne , A Burls . Health technology assessment: History and demand. J Public Health Med. 2003;25:98101.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
  • ISSN: 0266-4623
  • EISSN: 1471-6348
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords: