Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A retrospective comparison of systematic reviews with same-topic rapid reviews.
Reynen, Emily; Robson, Reid; Ivory, John; Hwee, Jeremiah; Straus, Sharon E; Pham, Ba'; Tricco, Andrea C.
Afiliación
  • Reynen E; Department of Medicine, Queen's University, Etherington Hall, Rooms 3032-3043, 94 Stuart Street, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada.
  • Robson R; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, East Building, Room 716, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1 W8, Canada.
  • Ivory J; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, East Building, Room 716, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1 W8, Canada.
  • Hwee J; Epidemiology Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, 6th floor, Toronto, Ontario M5T 3M7, Canada.
  • Straus SE; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, East Building, Room 716, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1 W8, Canada; Department of Geriatric Medicine, University of Toronto, 27 Kings College Circle, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1, Canada.
  • Pham B; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, East Building, Room 716, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1 W8, Canada.
  • Tricco AC; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, East Building, Room 716, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1 W8, Canada; Epidemiology Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, 6th floor, Toronto, Ontario M5T 3M7, Canada. Electronic add
J Clin Epidemiol ; 96: 23-34, 2018 04.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29258906
OBJECTIVE: To compare rapid reviews (RRs) to same-topic systematic reviews (SRs) for methods, studies included, and conclusions. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective comparison of studies comparing RRs and SRs by searching four scoping reviews published between 2007 and 2016. Reports were included if literature searches were conducted within 24 months of each other and had common research questions. Reviews were compared for duration, studies included, population, intervention, comparisons, outcomes, study designs, quality, methods, and conclusions. RESULTS: Six studies containing 16 review pairs were included, covering nine topics. Overall, RRs used abbreviated methods more often: no search of grey literature, employing one reviewer to screen studies, engaging fewer experts, including fewer studies, and providing shorter reports, with poorer reporting quality and faster completion. Reviews reported similar conclusions, with two exceptions: one SR did not include a key study; separately, two RRs failed to highlight an association with early mortality identified by the SR. RRs tended to provide less detail and fewer considerations. CONCLUSION: RRs used several methodological shortcuts compared with SRs on the same topic. It was challenging to discern methodological differences because of retrospective assessment and substantial nonreporting, particularly for RRs.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Proyectos de Investigación / Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Epidemiol Asunto de la revista: EPIDEMIOLOGIA Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Canadá Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Proyectos de Investigación / Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Epidemiol Asunto de la revista: EPIDEMIOLOGIA Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Canadá Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos