ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025
Developing Standards for Rapid Evaluation and Appraisal Methods (STREAM): An e-Delphi Consensus Study.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comprehensive geriatric assessment and optimisation in advanced chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and narrative synthesis examining clinical outcomes and decision-making.BMC nephrology · 2026Pooled it
- What Supports and Constrains the Implementation of Robust and Rapid Evaluation Within Local Government Public Health Systems?Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- A rapid evaluation of quality of sedation and ventilation care processes for critically ill patients in Vietnam.PloS one · 2026Article
- Developing Standards for Rapid Evaluation and Appraisal Methods (STREAM): An e-Delphi Consensus Study.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTimeliness is key to influencing the utility of evaluation and research findings and has given rise to a range of rapid evaluation and appraisal approaches. However, issues in the design, implementation and transparency in their reporting has led to concerns around their rigour and validity. To address this, we have developed the Standards for Rapid Evaluation and Appraisal Methods (STREAM).
methodsWe followed a four-stage consensus process, starting with a (1) steering group consultation; (2) three-stage e-Delphi study; (3) stakeholder consensus workshop; and (4) piloting exercise. The stakeholders invited to participate in the consensus process had experience in conducting, being part of, or commissioning rapid evaluations or appraisals.
resultsThirty-eight standards were developed with the purpose of guiding the design and implementation of rapid evaluations and appraisals and supporting the reporting of methods used.
conclusionsRapid evaluations and appraisals can be useful in time and resource limited contexts and in the response to new or changing services, but close attention needs to be paid to their rigour and other factors that might influence the production of knowledge and validity of the findings.
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.