ReviewImplementation science : IS2016
Designing a rapid response program to support evidence-informed decision-making in the Americas region: using the best available evidence and case studies.
Review in Implementation science : IS, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prioritizing policy issues for knowledge translation: a critical interpretive synthesis.Global health research and policy · 2025Pooled it
- Paper 2: Performing rapid reviews.Systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Mask decontamination methods (model N95) for respiratory protection: a rapid review.Systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Rapid reviews may produce different results to systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2019Pooled it
- What are the best methodologies for rapid reviews of the research evidence for evidence-informed decision making in health policy and practice: a rapid review.Health research policy and systems · 2016Pooled it
- How knowledge translation interventions involving health policy decision makers are evaluated: a scoping review protocol.HRB open research · 2026Article
- Rapid reviews methods series: assessing the appropriateness of conducting a rapid review.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2025Article
- Delivering rapid, up-to-date, high-quality evidence is feasible during health emergencies: PAHO living systematic review of 305 COVID-19 potential therapeutics.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2025Article
- [Evidence for Health Promotion in Brazil: report on a rapid response serviceEvidencia para la promoción de la salud en Brasil: informe sobre un servicio de respuesta rápida].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2024Article
- Knowledge management tools and mechanisms for evidence-informed decision-making in the WHO European Region: a scoping review.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework for evidence to policy networks.Evaluation and program planning · 2022Article
- Research use at the Ministry of Health in Burkina Faso: the decision-makers' perspective.Implementation science communications · 2021Article
- Brazilian guidelines for the management of brain-dead potential organ donors. The task force of the AMIB, ABTO, BRICNet, and the General Coordination of the National Transplant System.Annals of intensive care · 2020Article
- Assessing how information is packaged in rapid reviews for policy-makers and other stakeholders: a cross-sectional study.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the performance and achievements of the WHO Evidence-informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) Europe.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- Assessing the format and content of journal published and non-journal published rapid review reports: A comparative study.PloS one · 2020Article
- [Institutionalizing evidence-based policies in BrazilInstitucionalización de las políticas informadas por evidencia].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2020Article
- Strategies Implemented by Public Institutions to Approach the Judicialization of Health Care in Brazil: A Systematic Scoping Review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Article
- Evaluation of an HIV-specific rapid response service for community-based organisations in Ontario, Canada.Health research policy and systems · 2019Article
- Rapid response in health technology assessment: a Delphi study for a Brazilian guideline.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of this work was to inform the design of a rapid response program to support evidence-informed decision-making in health policy and practice for the Americas region. Specifically, we focus on the following: (1) What are the best methodological approaches for rapid reviews of the research evidence? (2) What other strategies are needed to facilitate evidence-informed decision-making in health policy and practice? and (3) How best to operationalize a rapid response program?
methodsThe evidence used to inform the design of a rapid response program included (i) two rapid reviews of methodological approaches for rapid reviews of the research evidence and strategies to facilitate evidence-informed decision-making, (ii) supplementary literature in relation to the "shortcuts" that could be considered to reduce the time needed to complete rapid reviews, (iii) four case studies, and (iv) supplementary literature to identify additional operational issues for the design of the program.
resultsThere is no agreed definition of rapid reviews in the literature and no agreed methodology for conducting them. Better reporting of rapid review methods is needed. The literature found in relation to shortcuts will be helpful in choosing shortcuts that maximize timeliness while minimizing the impact on quality. Evidence for other strategies that can be used concurrently to facilitate the uptake of research evidence, including evidence drawn from rapid reviews, is presented. Operational issues that need to be considered in designing a rapid response program include the implications of a "user-pays" model, the importance of recruiting staff with the right mix of skills and qualifications, and ensuring that the impact of the model on research use in decision-making is formally evaluated.
conclusionsWhen designing a new rapid response program, greater attention needs to be given to specifying the rapid review methods and reporting these in sufficient detail to allow a quality assessment. It will also be important to engage in other strategies to facilitate the uptake of the rapid reviews and to evaluate the chosen model in order to make refinements and add to the evidence base for evidence-informed decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.