ArticleBMJ evidence-based medicine2023
Rapid reviews methods series: Guidance on team considerations, study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment.
Article in BMJ evidence-based medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 14 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
53 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Different Training Modalities on Circulating Irisin Levels in Overweight and Obesity Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Pooled it
- Risk factors for cervical artery dissection: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Qualitative perceptions of child and youth mental health services by caregivers in the WHO European Region: a systematic review of qualitative literature.European journal of public health · 2026Pooled it
- Antileukemic therapies for older adults with AML ineligible for conventional therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis.Blood advances · 2026Pooled it
- From interface to outcome: a 4I framework for AI-linked functionality in electronic health records.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Pooled it
- Volume-outcome relationship in anatomical and non-anatomical liver resections: a rapid systematic review.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Pooled it
- Volume‒outcome relationships in bariatric surgery: a rapid review.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Approaches to economic evaluations of complex interventions in thailand: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Policy models for preventative interventions in cardiometabolic diseases: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Mechanical restraint in inpatient psychiatric settings: A systematic review of international prevalence, associations, outcomes, and reduction strategies.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025Pooled it
- Training and education provided to local change champions within implementation trials: a rapid systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2025Pooled it
- Can integrated care interventions strengthen primary care and improve outcomes for patients with chronic diseases? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Health research policy and systems · 2025Pooled it
- A Rapid Systematic Review Assessing the Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Self-Management in Workers with Long-Term Health Conditions and Disabilities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Pooled it
- Performance and Consistency of Large Language Models in Key Labor-Intensive Tasks of Systematic Reviews.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Use of cost analysis in examinations of health coaching interventions: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Article
- A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Two-Dimensional Breast Ultrasound Radiomics: Implications for Lesion Characterization and Diagnostic Accuracy.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Review
- Rapid Reviews: A Tutorial.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Article
- From Rapid Reviews to Rapid Living Evidence Synthesis: Lessons From COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Reviews for Canadian Public Health Decision-Making.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper is part of a series of methodological guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group (RRMG). Rapid reviews (RRs) use modified systematic review (SR) methods to accelerate the review process while maintaining systematic, transparent and reproducible methods to ensure integrity. This paper addresses considerations around the acceleration of study selection, data extraction and risk of bias (RoB) assessment in RRs. If a RR is being undertaken, review teams should consider using one or more of the following methodological shortcuts: screen a proportion (eg, 20%) of records dually at the title/abstract level until sufficient reviewer agreement is achieved, then proceed with single-reviewer screening; use the same approach for full-text screening; conduct single-data extraction only on the most relevant data points and conduct single-RoB assessment on the most important outcomes, with a second person verifying the data extraction and RoB assessment for completeness and correctness. Where available, extract data and RoB assessments from an existing SR that meets the eligibility criteria.
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.