Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:49:39.901Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

VP166 Selecting Rapid Review Methods For Health Technology Assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 January 2018

Eva Kaltenthaler ,
Katy Cooper ,
Marrissa Martyn-St James ,
Abdullah Pandor  and
Ruth Wong
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
INTRODUCTION:

Rapid reviews are of increasing importance within Health Technology Assessment (HTA) due to the need for timely evidence to underpin the assessment of new technologies as well as financial constraints. There are many rapid review methods available (1) although there is little guidance as to the most suitable methods (2). A recent paper outlines issues to consider when selecting rapid review methods (3). The aim of this presentation is to present key aspects to consider when selecting rapid review methods.

METHODS:

We searched the evidence base for guidance on the selection of rapid review methods. We also examined three recently completed systematic reviews to identify rapid review methods used, the reasons for selection and the strengths and weaknesses of each method. Finally we identified key aspects to consider when selecting rapid review methods.

RESULTS:

The evidence on guidance identified for the selection of rapid review methods was very limited. The analysis of the three reviews found that each review had distinctly different challenges, such as large numbers of relevant trials and heterogeneity in terms of populations, interventions, comparators and outcomes. All reviews included at least ten randomized controlled trials and numerous outcome measures. Three different approaches to the rapid review of the evidence were used in the three reviews. Key themes to consider when selecting rapid review methods were identified. These include: the size and nature of the evidence base, the characteristics of included studies and the expectations of those commissioning the review.

CONCLUSIONS:

Rapid review methods need to be chosen to fit the needs of the review, each of which may have different challenges. Collaboration between those producing rapid reviews and commissioners is crucial when choosing methods to ensure that the needs of commissioners are met and limitations associated with the chosen methods are understood.

Type
Vignette Presentations
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 33 , Special Issue S1: Conference Theme: Towards an HTA Ecosystem: From Local Needs to Global Opportunities , 2017 , pp. 225 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

References

REFERENCES:

1. Tsertsvadze, A, Chen, YF, Moher, D, Sutcliffe, P, McCarthy, N. How to conduct systematic reviews more expeditiously? Syst Rev. 2015;4:160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Polisena, J, Garritty, C, Umsheid, CA, et al. Rapid review summit: an overview and initiation of a research agenda. Syst Rev. 2015;4:111.Google Scholar
3. Kaltenthaler, E, Cooper, K, Pandor, A, et al. The use of rapid review methods in health technology assessments: 3 case studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16 (1):26.Google Scholar