The Healthcare Improvement Scotland evidence note rapid review process: Providing timely, reliable evidence to inform imperative decisions on healthcare

International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 95-101

  McIntosh, Heather M ^a   Calvert, Julie ^a   Macpherson, Karen J ^a   Thompson, Lorna ^a  

^a HEALTHCARE IMPROVEMENT SCOTLAND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Evidence based policy; Health technology assessment; Methodology; Rapid review; Scotland

Indexed keywords

ACCREDITATION; AWARENESS; HUMAN; PEER REVIEW; PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; RELIABILITY; SCOTLAND; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROCEDURES; PUBLIC HEALTH; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ACCREDITATION; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; NATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS; PEER REVIEW; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SCOTLAND; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84975299470     PISSN: 17441595     EISSN: 17441609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000078     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Solesbury W Evidence based policy: whence it came and where it's going London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, Queen Mary University of London; 2001. Working Paper No. 1.
2. International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. The HTA glossary. 2016. http://htaglossary.net/HomePage. [Accessed 8 February 2016].
3. Khangura S, Polisena J, Clifford TJ, et al. Rapid review: an emerging approach to evidence synthesis in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2014; 30: 20-7.
4. Pieper D, Antoine SL, Morfeld JC, et al. Methodological approaches in conducting overviews: current state in HTA agencies. Res Synth Methods 2014; 5: 187-99.
5. Hailey D, Corabian P, Harstall C, Schneider W. The use and impact of rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2000; 16: 651-6.
6. Khangura S, Konnyu K, Cushman R, et al. Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Syst Rev 2012; 1: 10.
7. Watt A, Cameron A, Strum L, et al. Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: an inventory of current practice in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2008; 24: 133-9.
8. Watt A, Cameron A, Strum L, et al. Rapid versus full systematic reviews: validity in clinical practice? Aust N Z J Surg 2008; 78: 1037-40.
9. The Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane Innovations [online]. 2016. http://www.cochrane.org/about-us/cochrane-innovations. [Accessed 8 February 2016].
10. Thomas J, Newman M, Oliver S. Rapid evidence assessments of research to inform social policy: taking stock and moving forward. Evid Policy 2013; 9: 5-27.
11. Harker J, Kleijnen J. What is a rapid review? A methodological exploration of rapid reviews in Health Technology Assessments. Int J Evid Based Healthc 2012; 10: 397-410.
12. Ganann R, Ciliska D, Thomas H. Expediating systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implement Sci 2010; 5: 56.
13. Polisena J, Garritty C, Kamel C, et al. Rapid review programs to support health care and policy decision making: a descriptive analysis of processes and methods. Syst Rev 2015; 4: 26.
14. Polisena J, Garritty C, Umscheid CA, et al. Rapid Review Summit: an overview and initiation of a research agenda. Syst Rev 2015; 4: 111.
15. Turner L, Boutron I, Hrobjartsson A, et al. The evolution of assessing bias in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: celebrating methodological contributions of the Cochrane Collaboration. Syst Rev 2013; 2: 79.
16. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org.
17. Whiting P, Savovic J, Higgins JPT, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 69: 225-34.
18. Bambra C, Joyce KE, Bellis MA, et al. Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy. J Public Health 2010; 32: 496-505.