Rapid Review: An Emerging Approach to Evidence Synthesis in Health Technology Assessment

Khangura, Sara D.; Polisena, Julie; Clifford, Tammy; Farrah, Kelly; Kamel, Chris

doi:10.1017/s0266462313000664

Cited by 123 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

105

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The RERP presents a method to streamline the process of guideline review and data collection while maintaining a rigorous evidence-based grounding. We took advantage of multiple existing frameworks to streamline our process while maintaining rigor: current evidence search and environmental scan procedures [17,36], the National Cancer Institute's Research-Tested Intervention Program's review process, the modified Delphi panel process, the GRADE ratings and summary of findings tables, and the TICD coding framework). Utilizing these existing frameworks for each part of the evidence search and review process allowed for a systematic process that was feasible to complete within approximately 4 months.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We developed our process to take advantage of existing measures, rapid evidence review methods, consensus-based decision making methods, and rapid qualitative analysis methods [17,18,20]. The process we developed attempts to streamline the information provided to an expert panel and enable the panel to meet just twice to evaluate and prioritize multiple interventions, once in a one-hour introductory teleconference, and again in a face-to-face five-hour meeting.…”

Section: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of procedures exist to conduct rapid reviews of literature [17,18,20]. We chose to conduct a thorough environmental scan [17].…”

Section: Step 1: Conduct a Rapid Environmental Scan To Identify Promimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We chose to conduct a thorough environmental scan [17]. We first sought to identify the relevant topic domains.…”

Section: Step 1: Conduct a Rapid Environmental Scan To Identify Promimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Methods of rapid analysis have been developed to aid pragmatic application of research, such as ethnographic-style analysis [15,16] and assessment of health technology literature [17,18]. To our knowledge, however, no methods exist to address our question: "How can health systems rapidly identify and evaluate technology-based tools that claim to improve clinical care, in order to prioritize them for local use?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A Rapid Process for Identifying and Prioritizing Technology-Based Tools for Health System Implementation (Preprint)

Dibble¹,

Iott²,

Flynn³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Putting new technologies into clinical practice requires a rapid and trustworthy decision-making process, informed by best evidence. Objective: We present a rapid evidence review process that can be used to inform health system leaders and clinicians seeking to implement new technology tools to improve patient-clinician decision-making and patient-oriented outcomes. Methods:We conducted an environmental scan of health IT literature to identify relevant digital tools in oncology care. We synthesized the recent literature using current evidence review methods, creating visual summaries for use by a panel of national experts. Panelists were taken through a modified-Delphi process to prioritize tools for implementation. Findings from the rapid evidence review panel (RERP) were taken to a local validation panel for further review. Results: Our rapid evidence review process shows promise for informing decision making by reducing the amount of time and resources needed to identify and prioritize a proliferating set of IT tools. Despite evidence for improved patient outcomes, panelists had substantial concerns about implementing patient reported outcome tracking tools, voicing concerns about liability, lack of familiarity with new technology, and additional time and workflow changes such tools would require. Instead, clinicians favored technologies that did not require clinician involvement. Conclusions: Health system leaders can use the rapid evidence review process presented here to usefully inform local technology implementation and practice policy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of procedures exist to conduct rapid reviews of literature [17,18,20]. We chose to conduct a thorough environmental scan [17].…”

Section: Step 1: Conduct a Rapid Environmental Scan To Identify Promimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We chose to conduct a thorough environmental scan [17]. We first sought to identify the relevant topic domains.…”

Section: Step 1: Conduct a Rapid Environmental Scan To Identify Promimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Rapid Process for Identifying and Prioritizing Technology-Based Tools for Health System Implementation (Preprint)

Dibble¹,

Iott²,

Flynn³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Identifying Recommendations for Stopping or Scaling Back Unnecessary Routine Services in Primary Care

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCE Much of health care involves established, routine use of medical services for chronic conditions or prevention. Stopping these services when the evidence changes or if the benefits no longer outweigh the risks is essential. Yet, most guidelines focus on escalating care and provide few explicit recommendations to stop or scale back (ie, deintensify) treatment and testing.OBJECTIVE To develop a systematic, transparent, and reproducible approach for identifying, specifying, and validating deintensification recommendations associated with routine adult primary care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSA focused review of existing guidelines and recommendations was completed to identify and prioritize potential deintensification indications. Then, 2 modified virtual Delphi expert panels examined the synthesized evidence, suggested ways that the candidate recommendations could be improved, and assessed the validity of the recommendations using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Twenty-five physicians from Veterans Affairs and US academic institutions with knowledge in relevant clinical areas (eg, geriatrics, primary care, women's health, cardiology, and endocrinology) served as panel members. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESValidity of the recommendations, defined as high-quality evidence that deintensification is likely to improve patient outcomes, evidence that intense testing and/or treatment could cause harm in some patients, absence of evidence on the benefit of continued or repeated intense treatment or testing, and evidence that deintensification is consistent with high-quality care.RESULTS A total of 409 individual recommendations were identified representing 178 unique opportunities to stop or scale back routine services (eg, stopping population-based screening for vitamin D deficiency and decreasing concurrent use of opioids and benzodiazepines). Thirty-seven recommendations were prioritized and forwarded to the expert panels. Panelists reviewed the evidence and suggested modifications, resulting in 44 recommendations being rated. Overall, 37 recommendations (84%) were considered to be valid, as assessed by the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this study, a total of 178 unique opportunities to deintensify routine primary care services were identified, and 37 of these were validated as high-priority deintensification recommendations. To date, this is the first study to develop a model for identifying, specifying, and validating deintensification recommendations that can be implemented and tracked in clinical practice.

show abstract

The transition from linear economy to circular economy for sustainability among SMEs: A study on prospects, impediments, and prerequisites

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The circular economy (CE) is a more holistic approach that advocates towards extracting the value from the waste and reaching sustainability goals. The objective of the present study is to highlight the prospects, impediments, and prerequisites while transiting from the linear economy (LE) to CE of SMEs. The study gathers information on prospects, impediments, and prerequisites for the transition of LE to a CE from recent studies. A semi-structured interview questionnaire was prepared, and a survey was conducted on representatives of six SMEs. Further, six caselets were developed to understand the prospects, impediments, and prerequisites based on the findings of the interview and previous information gained from existing literature.The major prospects favoring transition from LE to CE found in the study are significance of 3R (reduce and reuse and recycling) approach, CE leads to competitive advantage, recycling attracts consumers in few cases, CE helps in achieving sustainability goals and reuse of materials are significant in resource conservation.There are certain impediments found such as issues associated with awareness, recyclability issues, financial challenges, and weak management vision of SMEs towards CE implementation. Other resource-based impediments were found related to trained employees, lack of experience. Whereas, consumer acceptability is also a major concern towards implementing CE. The findings of the study suggest major prerequisites towards CE implementations such as strong "management will," innovation, technology up-gradation, training to employees, motivation, and appropriate guidelines. Government pressure to implement CE cannot be an effective step towards the transition of LE to CE.circular economy (CE), circular economy impediments, circular economy prerequisites, circular economy prospects, linear economy (LE), recycling, sustainable development, waste management 1 | INTRODUCTION LE is the conventional system and has been practiced for a very long time, but it does not give a driving force towards sustainable development (Ghisellini & Ulgiati, 2020). LE only focuses on the procurement of raw material, manufacturing, and converting it into a finished product and disposal. LE not much talks about regaining the value from the end-cycle of the product. The major challenges of LE

show abstract

Rapid Review: An Emerging Approach to Evidence Synthesis in Health Technology Assessment

Cited by 123 publications

References 20 publications

A Rapid Process for Identifying and Prioritizing Technology-Based Tools for Health System Implementation (Preprint)

A Rapid Process for Identifying and Prioritizing Technology-Based Tools for Health System Implementation (Preprint)

Identifying Recommendations for Stopping or Scaling Back Unnecessary Routine Services in Primary Care

The transition from linear economy to circular economy for sustainability among SMEs: A study on prospects, impediments, and prerequisites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About