Though SLRs remain the gold standard for evidence synthesis, they are time-consuming (typically taking upwards of 6 months to conduct). Therefore, they are not feasible under circumstances where time is critical; a striking example being the unfolding COVID-19 pandemic, when there was an urgent need to collate and summarize evidence. In such situations, rapid reviews (also referred to as ‘rapid evidence assessments’, ‘rapid evidence syntheses’ and ‘evidence summaries’, amongst other terms) are preferable. These focused reviews, which typically take from 1-4 weeks, provide high-quality evidence in the most efficient manner.
However, in common with all non-systematic reviews, rapid reviews are subject to certain limitations. For example, relevant information may be missed, and there may be an increased risk of selection, retrieval or publication bias due to the limited search strategy. As a result, conclusions based on rapid reviews run the risk of being less generalizable and less certain than those based on SLRs.
To mitigate these issues, Bridge have developed best practices for rapid reviews, described below.
Experienced teams
Rapid review teams are led by a senior expert with extensive experience in conducting literature reviews. This ensures that any bias is quickly identified and data are critically appraised in real-time.
The right methodology
The methodology should be tailored to the needs of the end user. Focused research questions and limiting to the highest-quality papers can aid efficiency. Our AI-enabled rapid reviews allow for a structured search approach along with quick delivery.
Focused deliverables
Findings are reported in a clear, concise and user-friendly manner, ideally in a slideset highlighting key messages and using summary graphics where possible.
