Abstract：
Rapid review (RR) could accelerate the traditional systematic review (SR) process by simplifying or omitting steps using various shortcuts. With the increasing popularity of RR, numerous shortcuts had emerged, but there was no consensus on how to choose the most appropriate ones. This study conducted a literature search in PubMed from inception to December 21, 2023, using terms such as \"rapid review\" \"rapid assessment\" \"rapid systematic review\" and \"rapid evaluation\". We also scanned the reference lists and performed citation tracking of included impact studies to obtain more included studies. We conducted a narrative synthesis of all RR approaches, shortcuts and studies assessing their effectiveness at each stage of RRs. Based on the current evidence, we provided recommendations on utilizing certain shortcuts in RRs. Ultimately, we identified 185 studies focusing on summarizing RR approaches and shortcuts, or evaluating their impact. There was relatively sufficient evidence to support the use of the following shortcuts in RRs: limiting studies to those published in English-language; conducting abbreviated database searches (e.g., only searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL); omitting retrieval of grey literature; restricting the search timeframe to the recent 20 years for medical intervention and the recent 15 years for reviewing diagnostic test accuracy; conducting a single screening by an experienced screener. To some extent, the above shortcuts were also applicable to SRs. This study provided a reference for future RR researchers in selecting shortcuts, and it also presented a potential research topic for methodologists.
摘要：
快速审查（RR）可以通过使用各种快捷方式简化或省略步骤来加速传统的系统审查（SR）过程。随着RR的日益普及,出现了许多捷径，但是在如何选择最合适的问题上没有达成共识。本研究从开始到2023年12月21日，在PubMed进行了文献检索，使用诸如“快速审查”“快速评估”“快速系统审查”和“快速评估”等术语。我们还扫描了参考列表，并对纳入影响研究进行了引文跟踪，以获得更多纳入研究。我们对所有RR方法进行了叙述性综合，快捷方式和研究评估它们在每个阶段的效果。根据目前的证据,我们提供了在RR中使用某些快捷方式的建议。最终,我们确定了185项研究，重点是总结RR方法和捷径，或评估其影响。有相对充分的证据支持在RR中使用以下快捷方式：将研究限制为以英语发表的研究；进行缩写的数据库搜索（例如，仅搜索PubMed/MEDLINE，Embase,和CENTRAL）；省略灰色文献的检索；将搜索时间限制在最近20年的医疗干预时间和最近15年的诊断测试准确性审查时间；由经验丰富的筛选员进行一次筛选。在某种程度上,上述捷径也适用于SRs。本研究为未来RR研究人员选择捷径提供了参考。它也为方法学家提出了一个潜在的研究课题。
