Priority III: top 10 rapid review methodology research priorities identified using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership

Abstract

Objectives: A rapid review is a form of evidence synthesis considered a resource-efficient alternative to the conventional systematic review. Despite a dramatic rise in the number of rapid reviews commissioned and conducted in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, published evidence on the optimal methods of planning, doing, and sharing the results of these reviews is lacking. The Priority III study aimed to identify the top 10 unanswered questions on rapid review methodology to be addressed by future research.

Study design and setting: A modified James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership approach was adopted. This approach used two online surveys and a virtual prioritization workshop with patients and the public, reviewers, researchers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders to identify and prioritize unanswered questions.

Results: Patients and the public, researchers, reviewers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders identified and prioritized the top 10 unanswered research questions about rapid review methodology. Priorities were identified throughout the entire review process, from stakeholder involvement and formulating the question, to the methods of a systematic review that are appropriate to use, through to the dissemination of results.

Conclusion: The results of the Priority III study will inform the future research agenda on rapid review methodology. We hope this will enhance the quality of evidence produced by rapid reviews, which will ultimately inform decision-making in the context of healthcare.

Keywords: Evidence synthesis; Methodology; PPI; Priority Setting Partnership; Rapid review; Systematic review.