ArticleSystematic reviews2022
Paper 1: Demand-driven rapid reviews for health policy and systems decision-making: lessons from Lebanon, Ethiopia, and South Africa on researchers and policymakers' experiences.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advanced Competencies for Endoscopy Nurses: A Rapid Review of Current Practices and Training Approaches.Nursing & health sciences · 2026Review
- Barriers and facilitators to the institutionalization and sustainability of knowledge translation platforms in the eastern Mediterranean: a scoping review.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Enablers and barriers for policymaker engagement in health research from the perspective of policymakers: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Rapid reviews methods series: assessing the appropriateness of conducting a rapid review.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 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
- How to develop rapid reviews of diagnostic tests according to experts: A qualitative exploration of researcher views.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023Article
- Rapid reviews for health policy and systems decision-making: more important than ever before.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRapid reviews have emerged as an approach to provide contextualized evidence in a timely and efficient manner. Three rapid review centers were established in Ethiopia, Lebanon, and South Africa through the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization, to stimulate demand, engage policymakers, and produce rapid reviews to support health policy and systems decision-making. This study aimed to assess the experiences of researchers and policymakers engaged in producing and using rapid reviews for health systems strengthening and decisions towards universal health coverage (UHC).
methodsUsing a case study approach with qualitative research methods, experienced researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with respondents from each center (n = 16). The topics covered included the process and experience of establishing the centers, stimulating demand for rapid reviews, collaborating between researchers and policymakers, and disseminating and using rapid reviews for health policies and interventions and the potential for sustaining and institutionalizing the services. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
resultsMajor themes interacted and contributed to shape the experiences of stakeholders of the rapid review centers, including the following: organizational structural arrangements of the centers, management of their processes as input factors, and the rapid reviews as the immediate policy-relevant outputs. The engagement process and the rapid review products contributed to a final theme of impact of the rapid review centers in relation to the uptake of evidence for policy and systems decision-making.
conclusionsThe experiences of policymakers and researchers of the rapid review centers determined the uptake of evidence. The findings of this study can inform policymakers, health system managers, and researchers on best practices for demanding, developing and using rapid reviews to support decision- and policymaking, and implementing the universal healthcare coverage agenda.
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.