You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Table 2 General characteristics of included rapid reviews

From: Assessing how information is packaged in rapid reviews for policy-makers and other stakeholders: a cross-sectional study

Characteristics All (n = 103) Journal
published (n = 52)
Non-journal published (n = 51)
Country of corresponding author or producer, n (%)
 Canada 42 (41) 12 (23) 30 (59)
 United Kingdom 21 (20) 20 (38) 1 (2)
 Australia 14 (14) 4 (8) 10 (20)
 United States 10 (10) 3 (6) 7 (14)
 Belgium 3 (3) 2 (4) 1 (1)
 Scotland 3 (3) 1 (2) 2 (4)
 Italy 2 (2) 2 (4) 0
 China, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sweden, Taiwana 1 (1) 1 (2) 0
List of authors cited, n (%) 89 (86) 52 (100) 37 (73)
Reported funding, n (%) 67 (65) 39 (75) 28 (55)
Funding source, n
 External, peer-reviewed grant 8 6 2
 External, non-commercial (fee for service) 47 22 25
 External, commercial (fee for service) 2 2 0
 Internal 1 0 1
 Specified no funding received 9 9 0
Purpose or rationale for RR conveyed by the authors 63 (61) 33 (63) 30 (59)
Time to conduct the RR reported, n (%) 6 (6) 3 (6) 3 (6)
 4 weeks 2 0 2
 8 weeks 1 1 0
 17 weeks 1 0 1
 24 weeks 1 1 0
 32 weeks 1 1 0
Main intervention, n (%)
 Pharmacological 17 (17) 4 (8) 13 (25)
 Non-pharmacological 57 (55) 29 (56) 28 (55)
 Mixed 5 (5) 1 (2) 4 (8)
 Other (does not address an intervention or exposure) 24 (23) 18 (35) 6 (12)
Number of study designs included in the RRs, n (%)
 One 37 (36) 14 (27) 23 (45)
 Two or more 66 (64) 38 (73) 28 (55)
Frequency of included study designs, nb
 Systematic reviews 40 15 25
 Randomised controlled trials 41 17 24
 Observations studies (cohorts, case-control, cross-sectional) 61 36 25
 Otherc 37 21 16
 Unclear 40 28 12
Peer reviewed, n (%) 56 (54) 50 (96)d 6 (12)e
RRs publicly available, n (%) 86 (83) 36 (69) 50 (98)
Journal Impact Factor, median (inter-quartile range)[range]f n/a 2 (1) [0.57–47.83] n/a
Language of the RRs in English, n (%) 102 (99) 52 (100) 50 (98)
  1. RR rapid review
  2. aPer country
  3. bOther may qualitative, quasi-experimental design including interrupted time series, controlled before/after, case series etc.
  4. cDenotes the frequency of the included study designs
  5. dPeer review confirmed if journal listed on the DOAJ or if specifically stated as a policy of the journal
  6. eNon-journal-published RRs peer review status based on reporting of methods in each report and/or from available methods guidance from respective institutions
  7. fBased on unique journals (n = 47), of which 39 reported impact factors for 2016 (Additional file 2)