Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Meta-regressiegebaseerde snelle review× | Snelle Review× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Scientometrie | Scientometrie |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 2000s–2010s (convergence of rapid review and meta-regression) | 2000s (rapidly adopted after 2005; Cochrane guidance 2020–2021) |
| Grondlegger≠ | Meta-regression: Simon Thompson & Stephen Sharp (1999); Rapid review methodology: Cochrane, WHO, and health technology assessment bodies (2000s onward) | Developed and formalised by health technology assessment agencies and the Cochrane Collaboration |
| Type≠ | Quantitative evidence synthesis variant | Evidence synthesis review |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Thompson, S. G., & Sharp, S. J. (1999). Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: A comparison of methods. Statistics in Medicine, 18(20), 2693–2708. DOI ↗ | Garritty, C., Gartlehner, G., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., King, V. J., Hamel, C., Kamel, C., Affengruber, L., & Stevens, A. (2021). Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 130, 13–22. DOI ↗ |
| Aliassen | rapid review with meta-regression, accelerated meta-regression review, rapid synthesis with meta-regression, RRMR | rapid evidence review, accelerated systematic review, rapid evidence assessment, REA |
| Verwant | 5 | 5 |
| Samenvatting≠ | A meta-regression-based rapid review is an accelerated evidence synthesis that combines the time-efficient protocols of a rapid review with meta-regression analysis to identify which study-level or population-level characteristics explain variability in effect sizes across included studies. By streamlining search and screening steps without sacrificing the explanatory power of regression modeling, this approach delivers actionable heterogeneity insights under decision-making time constraints. | A rapid review is a streamlined form of systematic review that deliberately simplifies or omits certain steps — such as dual screening, exhaustive grey-literature search, or full risk-of-bias assessment — in order to deliver timely, policy-relevant evidence synthesis within weeks rather than years. It is increasingly used by health agencies, governments, and organisations facing urgent decision-making needs where a full systematic review is not feasible within the available time and resources. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|