What happened next? A survey of review clients evaluating impacts of rapid reviews

IF 7.3 2区医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology Pub Date : 2025-01-10 DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111673

Peter Bragge , Emily C. Clark , Veronica Delafosse , Ngo Cong-Lem , Diki Tsering , Paul Kellner , Alyssa Kostopoulos , Maureen Dobbins

{"title":"What happened next? A survey of review clients evaluating impacts of rapid reviews","authors":"Peter Bragge , Emily C. Clark , Veronica Delafosse , Ngo Cong-Lem , Diki Tsering , Paul Kellner , Alyssa Kostopoulos , Maureen Dobbins","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>End-user evaluation of the impact of evidence syntheses is critical to demonstrating value. This study presents results of a survey evaluating the impact of rapid reviews undertaken by two teams based in Melbourne, Australia, and Hamilton, Canada.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Clients were invited to participate in a short written survey following delivery of a rapid review. Survey items encompassed reach, usefulness and format; interactions with the review teams; and overall satisfaction.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twenty-five completed surveys from 53 invitations were received pertaining to 19 rapid reviews conducted between September 2021 and October 2023. Topics encompassed COVID-19, health and behavior change; reports were an average of 31 pages; and were delivered over an average of 62 days. Evaluation findings were positive, with high satisfaction with reports and service delivery; very high satisfaction with report structure and length; good evidence of reach (reports read by decision makers and cited in other documents); and evidence that the rapid reviews made contributions to strategic planning, policy and program funding decisions.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Rapid reviews are making impactful contributions, alongside other inputs, to policy and practice. Further research is required to build this evaluation dataset; examine the balance between timeliness and methodological rigor in evidence synthesis; and explore models of delivery and capacity within and outside of government. It is also critical to promote implementation efforts to harness the full potential of rapid reviews and other evidence syntheses to impact the lives of citizens.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","volume":"180 ","pages":"Article 111673"},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089543562500006X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

End-user evaluation of the impact of evidence syntheses is critical to demonstrating value. This study presents results of a survey evaluating the impact of rapid reviews undertaken by two teams based in Melbourne, Australia, and Hamilton, Canada.

Methods

Clients were invited to participate in a short written survey following delivery of a rapid review. Survey items encompassed reach, usefulness and format; interactions with the review teams; and overall satisfaction.

Results

Twenty-five completed surveys from 53 invitations were received pertaining to 19 rapid reviews conducted between September 2021 and October 2023. Topics encompassed COVID-19, health and behavior change; reports were an average of 31 pages; and were delivered over an average of 62 days. Evaluation findings were positive, with high satisfaction with reports and service delivery; very high satisfaction with report structure and length; good evidence of reach (reports read by decision makers and cited in other documents); and evidence that the rapid reviews made contributions to strategic planning, policy and program funding decisions.

Conclusion

Rapid reviews are making impactful contributions, alongside other inputs, to policy and practice. Further research is required to build this evaluation dataset; examine the balance between timeliness and methodological rigor in evidence synthesis; and explore models of delivery and capacity within and outside of government. It is also critical to promote implementation efforts to harness the full potential of rapid reviews and other evidence syntheses to impact the lives of citizens.

查看原文本刊更多论文

接下来发生了什么？对评估快速评审影响的评审客户的调查。

最终用户对证据综合影响的评估对于证明价值至关重要。本研究提出了一项调查的结果，该调查评估了澳大利亚墨尔本和加拿大汉密尔顿的两个小组进行的快速审查的影响。方法：客户被邀请参加一个简短的，书面调查后交付的快速审查。调查项目包括范围、有用性和格式；与评审团队的互动；总体满意度。结果：在2021年9月至2023年10月期间进行的19次快速审查中，收到了53份邀请，完成了25项调查。主题包括COVID-19、健康和行为改变；报告平均为31页；平均交付时间为62天。评价结果是积极的，对报告和提供的服务非常满意；对报告的结构和长度非常满意；良好的影响证据（决策者阅读并在其他文件中引用的报告）；并有证据表明，快速审查有助于战略规划、政策和项目资助决策。结论：快速审查与其他投入一起对政策和实践作出了有影响力的贡献。需要进一步的研究来建立这个评估数据集；审查证据合成的及时性和方法严谨性之间的平衡；探索政府内外的交付模式和能力。还必须促进实施工作，充分利用快速审查和其他证据综合的潜力，影响公民的生活。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生

CiteScore

12.00

自引率

6.90%

发文量

320

审稿时长

44 days

期刊介绍： The Journal of Clinical Epidemiology strives to enhance the quality of clinical and patient-oriented healthcare research by advancing and applying innovative methods in conducting, presenting, synthesizing, disseminating, and translating research results into optimal clinical practice. Special emphasis is placed on training new generations of scientists and clinical practice leaders.