A rapid review is a faster and less comprehensive version of a systematic review, where the research literature is reviewed and analyzed in a shorter time frame using simplified or limited methods. The purpose is to provide a quick evidence-based assessment to support decision-making, often under time constraints.
|
Type |
Aim |
Search |
Quality Appraisal |
Evidence Synthesis |
Analysis |
|
Rapid Review |
To provide a quick, but systematic, synthesis of evidence to inform decision-making. |
Focused and limited search to balance comprehensiveness and timeliness. |
Abbreviated quality appraisal, often using simplified checklists. |
Provides a summary of evidence within a limited timeframe. |
Accelerated evidence synthesis, rapid thematic or quantitative analysis. |
|
Rapid Evidence Assessment |
To quickly evaluate and synthesise evidence on a specific question or topic. |
Systematic search with time constraints, aiming for key studies. |
Rapid but rigorous appraisal to ensure reliability of included studies. |
Synthesises key evidence to provide a timely summary for decision-making. |
Descriptive analysis, rapid meta-analysis. |
|
Rapid Realist Review |
To understand how and why interventions work, for whom, and in what contexts, quickly. |
Focused search for relevant studies and grey literature. |
Rapid appraisal focusing on relevance and rigour of included studies. |
Synthesises evidence to develop context-mechanism-outcome configurations. |
Realist synthesis, thematic analysis. |
Table inspired by: Sutton, A., Clowes, M., Preston, L., & Booth, A. (2019). Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 36(3), 202-222.
Rapid review compaired with systematic review
|
Type |
Aim |
Search |
Quality Appraisal |
Evidence Synthesis |
When needed? |
|
Rapid Review |
Seeks to search for, appraise and synthesise research evidence on a focused research question, using curtailed systematic review methods |
Aims to be as comprehensive as possible with the resource constraints of a pragmatic project. Typically more focused methods |
Time-limited formal quality assessment |
Typically narrative and tabular. |
Useful both during the discovery and product development phases and also as stand alone pieces of research that require efficiency. |
|
Systematic Review |
To comprehesively search for research evidence on a focussed topic, and systematically identify, appraise and synthesise all relevant evidence. |
Exhaustive, comprehensive searching. |
Formal quality assessment conducted in duplicate, using validated tool. |
Narrative with results tables, often including statistical synthesis. |
Useful to consolidate current evidence base and identify gaps in the literature. |
Table inspired by: Lavinia Ferrante Di Ruffano, Mary Chappell and Mary Edwards, YHEC
Dobbins, M, (2017). Rapid Review Guideline: Steps in a rapid review. National Collaborating Center for Methods and Tools
Garritty, C., Hamel, C., Trivella, M., Gartlehner, G., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., Devane, D., Kamel, C, Griebler, U. & King, V. J. (2024). Updated recommendations for the Cochrane rapid review methods guidance for rapid reviews of effectiveness. bmj, 384.
WHO has developed a training package for rapid reviews. This training package includes guidance on how to conduct rapid reviews in practice with supplementary materials for optional reading together with a small collection of databases for reference. Be aware that the package is aimed at WHO context.