Quality appraisal of evidence generated during a crisis: in defence of 'timeliness and 'clarity as criteria

In 2020, SARS-CoV-2 spread across the globe with incredible speed. Policymakers had to make impossible decisions and act quickly. With gold-standard systematic reviews taking 6 months–2 years to complete,1 it is no surprise that many authors used rapid review methods instead in order to provide guidance in a matter of days or weeks. In their review, Abbott et al graded the quality of 280 reviews published in the first 5 months of the pandemic and found 46 that were rapid reviews.2 This included our paper3: ‘The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence’. Rapid reviews are a well-recognised approach in which some aspects of a full systematic review are foregone in lieu of speed. In their detailed summary, the WHO noted six different approaches, all with pros and cons, that might be adopted where reviews are needed urgently.
Source: Evidence-Based Medicine - Category: Internal Medicine Authors: Tags: Letters Source Type: research