Rapid reviews: the pros and cons of an accelerated review process

Philip Moons, Eva Goossens, David, R. Thompson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

47 Citations (Scopus)
320 Downloads (Pure)


Although systematic reviews are the method of choice to synthesize scientific evidence, they can take years to complete and publish. Clinicians, managers, and policy-makers often need input from scientific evidence in a more timely and resource-efficient manner. For this purpose, rapid reviews are conducted. Rapid reviews are performed using an accelerated process. However, they should not be less systematic than standard systematic reviews, and the introduction of bias must be avoided. In this article, we describe what rapid reviews are, present their characteristics, give some examples, highlight potential pitfalls, and draw attention to the importance of evidence summaries in order to facilitate adoption in clinical decision-making.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)515-519
JournalEuropean Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
Issue number5
Early online date19 May 2021
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2021


  • Decision-making
  • Evidence summaries
  • Evidence-based healthcare
  • Rapid reviews
  • Research methods
  • Systematic reviews


Dive into the research topics of 'Rapid reviews: the pros and cons of an accelerated review process'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this