Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 13, 2025
The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Quality improvement needed for rapid review reports: a literature quality assessment based on Cochrane RR
Donghua Yang1,2, Yongjia Zhou3, Xiao Tang4
1Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, 730000, Germany.
Objectives:
The aim of this study was to assess the reporting quality of rapid reviews (RRs) against the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methodological Guidance to identify areas for improvement.
Methods:
A literature quality assessment was conducted through systematic searches in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science until February 28, 2023. An expert guided the search strategy, and the reporting quality of RRs was evaluated. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize reporting quality, and subgroup analyses were performed to examine differences between groups. Categorical variables were compared using the chi-square (χ2) test to identify statistically significant differences in reporting adherence across different subgroups.
Results:
Among the 112 rapid reviews analyzed, fewer than 50% fully reported four key methodological components: topic refinement with stakeholders, eligibility criteria co-definition, risk of bias assessment tools, and protocol/software reporting. Reports published after 2021 demonstrated slightly higher overall quality compared to those published before 2020, with significant improvements in protocol development (Item 2: χ2 = 10.434, P < 0.0001), PICOS specification (Item 3: χ2 = 5.378, P = 0.02), and protocol registration (Item 23: χ2 = 6.638, P = 0.01). Cochrane Rapid Reviews (CRRs) achieved 100% compliance in several key areas, including setting restrictions with justification (Item 4: χ2 = 52.923, P < 0.001) and study selection (Item 14: χ2 = 14.897, P < 0.001). The impact of journal prestige was also evident: publications in high-impact factor (IF > 5) journals showed significantly better compliance in stakeholder involvement (Item 1: χ2 = 8.856, P = 0.003) but comparable adherence to protocol registration (Item 23: ≤ 20.3%).
Conclusions:
While RR quality is improving post-2021, critical gaps persist in stakeholder engagement and protocol transparency. Mandatory adoption of Cochrane guidelines-particularly protocol registration (Item23) and dual data extraction (Item17)-should be prioritized in journal submission policies.
More Related Videos
08:36Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
10:38Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies
Published on: January 16, 2019
Related Concept Videos
01:11Purpose of Health Records I
Here's a breakdown of how health records serve these purposes:
01:17Cochran's Q Test
01:30Health Information Technology and Healthcare Information System
Health Information Technology, commonly called HIT, integrates advanced information systems and technology in healthcare settings. Its primary functions include:
01:23Methods of Documentation V: CBE
In CBE, healthcare professionals establish predefined standards of practice that define what constitutes...
01:20Introduction to Documentation and Reporting
Nursing documentation records essential information and details regarding a patient's care and treatment in written or electronic form. It is a critical aspect of nursing practice that involves documenting assessments, interventions, outcomes, and other relevant details about a patient's health status.
Documentation maps the patient's health journey by creating a comprehensive...
01:15Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...