期刊
RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS
卷 13, 期 5, 页码 558-572出版社
WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1580
关键词
COVID-19; modeling studies; pandemic; public health; rapid review; scoping review
资金
- German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)
This article discusses the challenges and lessons learned from planning and conducting rapid reviews of public health and social measures (PHSM) during the COVID-19 pandemic. It highlights the importance of stakeholder consultations, scoping reviews, and multiple complementary reviews to inform evidence-based decision-making. The article also emphasizes the need for skilled review teams, good planning and coordination, and carefully weighing scientific rigor and time savings in methodological shortcuts.
Public health and social measures (PHSM) have been central to the COVID-19 response. Consequently, there has been much pressure on decision-makers to make evidence-informed decisions and on researchers to synthesize the evidence regarding these measures. This article describes our experiences, responses and lessons learnt regarding key challenges when planning and conducting rapid reviews of PHSM during the COVID-19 pandemic. Stakeholder consultations and scoping reviews to obtain an overview of the evidence inform the scope of reviews that are policy-relevant and feasible. Multiple complementary reviews serve to examine the benefits and harms of PHSM across different populations and contexts. Conceiving reviews of effectiveness as adaptable living reviews helps to respond to evolving evidence needs and an expanding evidence base. An appropriately skilled review team and good planning, coordination and communication ensures smooth and rigorous processes and efficient use of resources. Scientific rigor, the practical implications of PHSM-related complexity and likely time savings should be carefully weighed in deciding on methodological shortcuts. Making the best possible use of modeling studies represents a particular challenge, and methods should be carefully chosen, piloted and implemented. Our experience raises questions regarding the nature of rapid reviews and regarding how different types of evidence should be considered in making decisions about PHSM during a global pandemic. We highlight the need for readily available protocols for conducting studies on the effectiveness, unintended consequences and implementation of PHSM in a timely manner, as well as the need for rapid review standards tailored to rapid versus emergency mode reviewing.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据