ABSTRACT

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the
demand for rapid evaluation of innovation in health and
social care. Assessment of rapid methodologies is lacking
although challenges in ensuring rigour and effective
use of resources are known. We mapped reports of
rapid evaluations of health and social care innovations,
categorised different approaches to rapid evaluation,
explored comparative benefits of rapid evaluation, and
identified knowledge gaps.

Design: Scoping review.

Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Health
Management Information Consortium (HMIC) databases
were searched through 13 September 2022.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: We included
publications reporting primary research or methods for
rapid evaluation of interventions or services in health and
social care in high-income countries.

Data extraction and synthesis: Two reviewers developed
and piloted a data extraction form. One reviewer extracted
data, a second reviewer checked 10% of the studies;
disagreements and uncertainty were resolved through
consensus. We used narrative synthesis to map different
approaches to conducting rapid evaluation.

Results: We identified 16 759 records and included 162
which met inclusion criteria.
We identified four main approaches for rapid evaluation:
(1) Using methodology designed specifically for rapid
evaluation; (2) Increasing rapidity by doing less or using
less time-intensive methodology; (3) Using alternative
technologies and/or data to increase speed of existing
evaluation method; (4) Adapting part of non-rapid
evaluation.
The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an increase in
publications and some limited changes in identified
methods. We found little research comparing rapid and
non-rapid evaluation.

Conclusions: We found a lack of clarity about what ‘rapid
evaluation’ means but identified some useful preliminary
categories. There is a need for clarity and consistency
about what constitutes rapid evaluation; consistent
terminology in reporting evaluations as rapid; development
of specific methodologies for making evaluation more
rapid; and assessment of advantages and disadvantages
of rapid methodology in terms of rigour, cost and impact.