Rapid and Targeted Literature Review
Pubrica conducts rapid and targeted literature reviews for organisations that need reliable evidence before a fixed decision date. A full systematic review usually takes about a year. Our information specialists and subject matter experts support policy makers, guideline groups, HTA teams, clinical teams, medical affairs teams and researchers by adapting systematic review methods to your deadline. Deliverables include a protocol with each shortcut declared, a reproducible search strategy, documented screening and appraisal, and a synthesis written for your decision, with each abbreviated step and the reason for it stated in the methods. This declaration is what distinguishes a recognised rapid review from an incomplete systematic review.
- Every shortcut declared: fewer databases, single screening with verification, a date limit or no grey literature, each stated in the methods
- Conducted to Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group guidance, which sets out how a rapid review remains methodologically defensible
- Targeted reviews for narrow questions: one population, one intervention and one outcome, answered without claiming to be exhaustive
- Reproducible search strategy, because abbreviating the method is acceptable only when it is reported
- Reports written for the decision-maker, presenting the finding first, then the method, and a clear statement of what a fuller review might change
Protocol with shortcuts declared upfrontIncluded
Reproducible search, fewer sourcesIncluded
Single screening with verificationIncluded
Limitations stated against a full reviewIncluded
Describing it as systematicNever, as it misrepresents the method
Question → shortcuts declared → searched → screened → decision
- Shortcuts declared in the methods
- Cochrane RRMG guidance followed
- Search still reproducible
- Limitations stated clearly
- Labelled as rapid, never as systematic
Service Scope
Four Rapid Review Service Areas, Available Individually
Pubrica offers each part of its rapid review service separately, because clients come to us at different stages, some with a question only and some with data already collected.
Who We Serve
Organisations and Researchers We Support with Rapid Reviews
We support academic researchers and also organisations that need evidence to inform a specific decision.
Deliverables
What Every Rapid Review Includes
The method is shortened, but every shortcut is reported in full. This transparency is what distinguishes a rapid review from a poorly conducted systematic review.
Example from a protocolChoosing the shortcuts after seeing the results makes a rapid review indefensible, because readers cannot tell which concessions were methodological and which were made for convenience.
Example from screeningSingle-reviewer screening is known to miss eligible studies, particularly among ambiguous records. Measuring this rate costs little, and reporting it is necessary for transparency.
Example from a methods sectionThe most common flaw in commissioned rapid reviews is a search described in a single sentence. It cannot be checked, and so it cannot be built on.
Example from a limitations sectionA rapid review that claims the same certainty as a systematic review misleads its readers. A rapid review that states where its evidence is limited gives the reader what they need.
The samples shown are illustrative and anonymised. Hover over a sample to replay it.
Compliance and Standards
Rapid Review Methodological and Reporting Standards
A rapid review departs from systematic review methods deliberately, so it must state which methods it departed from.
Cochrane Handbook (and methods group guidance)
The conduct reference for systematic reviews, used with the Rapid Reviews Methods Group interim guidance and the living systematic review guidance for the two variants that deliberately depart from it.
PRISMA 2020 (review reporting)
The reporting standard for systematic reviews, covering the flow of records, search reproducibility and the reasons for excluding each study at full text.
PRISMA-S (search reporting)
The 2021 search extension to PRISMA 2020. Its sixteen items cover where and how you searched, when, and what you found, which is the detail needed to make a search reproducible.
Quality management (cert. H3CR9TCU20251212INDQM10N)
Our certified quality system governs how work is run, recorded and released.
Responsible Use of AI
Responsible Use of AI with Every Methodological Shortcut Declared
Automation is particularly tempting in rapid reviews because time is the main constraint. An undeclared shortcut also does the most damage here, because the method already relies on stated concessions.
Why We Do Not Publish AI Accuracy Figures
Accuracy figures for AI tools are usually reported by the companies that sell them.
Pubrica therefore does not quote a self-generated accuracy figure, because it would carry the same conflict of interest. Instead, we tell you which tool was used on your project, at which stage, and what a specialist changed afterwards.
Methodology
How Our Rapid Review Process Works
We start with your deadline, because it determines which methodological concessions are possible.
Deadline and concessions
We establish the decision date and write the protocol around it, naming and justifying each abbreviation before any searching begins.
Search
We search fewer databases, run each search thoroughly and record it in full, so that its coverage is visible and reproducible.
Screening and extraction
Single screening with a verification sample, extraction to a defined form, and appraisal at the depth the decision requires.
Reporting for the decision
We present the findings first and the method second, with an explicit statement of what a fuller review might change.
Our Experts
Your Rapid Review Team
A named team of subject specialists stays with your project from scoping to delivery. Your project coordinator introduces each team member by name before work begins.
Identifies the evidence on which the work is based and documents the search so that it can be reproduced. Writes the search strategy line by line for each platform and hands it over with dates.
Determines what the work can claim on the basis of the evidence. The subject expert is matched to your topic and tells you clearly when the evidence does not support the conclusion you expected.
Reviews the work independently of the first pass and reconciles the two, because most errors in this work are transcription errors rather than errors of reasoning. Disagreements are logged and adjudicated.
Responsible for every decision that depends on the numbers. Confirms before analysis begins whether the data can answer the question, and hands over the code so the analysis can be re-run independently.
Packages
Rapid Review Packages
The cost depends on the breadth of the question and the length of the deadline. These two factors affect each other, and we agree the balance between them with you explicitly.
Targeted review
One population, one intervention, one outcome
Quoted per projectBased on question breadth
Delivery Set by your deadline
- ✓Narrow question agreed in writing
- ✓Two databases, recorded in full
- ✓Single screening with verification sample
- ✓Findings tabulated against the question
- ✓Limitations stated against a full review
Suitable when the question itself is narrow, not as a way of reducing the budget.
Deliverables Request a quoteRapid evidence assessment
For a decision with a fixed date
Quoted per projectBased on breadth and deadline
Delivery Set by your deadline
- ✓Protocol with every shortcut declared
- ✓Cochrane RRMG guidance applied
- ✓Three or more databases as time allows
- ✓Verification sample on screening
- ✓Risk of bias assessment where the decision requires it
- ✓Written for decision-makers
Please tell us your decision date first. It determines which concessions are possible and which are not worthwhile.
Deliverables Request a quoteRapid Review Followed by Full Systematic Review
Inform the decision now and publish later
Quoted per projectBased on the full review that follows
Delivery Two stages
- ✓Rapid review delivered to the decision date
- ✓Protocol written so the full review can extend it
- ✓Search rerun and widened afterwards
- ✓Dual screening added on the second pass
- ✓Published as a systematic review with both stages reported
The most economical route to both outputs, provided the rapid review is designed from the start to be extended rather than repeated.
Deliverables Request a quoteSend us your question and decision date. We will advise at no cost which form of review the question supports, and in some cases a targeted review will be sufficient.
Benefits
Benefits of a Pubrica Rapid Review
Four reasons clients commission a rapid review.
Quality Assurance
Our Service Commitments and Limitations
Our service terms are set out in full below.
Our revision commitment
Revision Support Within the Agreed Scope
We continue working within the agreed scope until the work meets the requirements we agreed. Our commitment is to complete the work you commissioned rather than to end the engagement with the problem unresolved.
01
Unlimited revisions within the agreed scope
There is no limit on the number of revision rounds and no time limit. If the work does not meet what we agreed, we revise it. Any widening of scope is quoted separately, and we tell you which applies before work starts.
02
Corrections at Our Cost
If the work needs correction because of an error in our analysis or writing, we correct it free of charge.
03
Delivery on the agreed date
We quote a date we can meet. If a milestone is at risk, we tell you early.
04
Mutual NDA on request
We sign a mutual NDA at no cost before you send any material, and we are happy to sign your NDA rather than ours.
05
Final decisions remain with you
We advise, give our view and tell you clearly when we disagree, but decisions about what is published in your name are always yours.
Average client rating
From 3,000 responses to Pubrica’s own post-delivery survey, sent to every client at handover between January 2024 and June 2026. This figure comes from our own records.
Service limitations. We cannot guarantee outcomes that depend on others, such as an editor’s decision, a funder’s panel or a regulator’s assessment. Within the agreed scope, we commit to the work itself: completed to the standard described on this page, delivered on the agreed date and corrected at our cost if we made an error.
FAQs
Rapid Review FAQs
If your question is not answered here, please ask an expert. No quote is required.
Yes, when it is labelled and reported as a rapid review. It is a recognised review type with its own methods guidance, is widely published and is routinely used in health policy.
A rapid review presented as a systematic review is not considered credible. Reviewers and assessors recognise this, and the loss of credibility outweighs the time saved.
A targeted review answers a question that is narrow by design. A rapid review answers a broad question under time pressure by abbreviating the method.
The first is a scope decision and the second is a methodological decision, and each is reported differently.
Yes, in many cases. Journals regularly publish rapid reviews and rapid evidence assessments, provided the abbreviations are declared in the methods.
If publication is a goal from the start, we design the protocol so that the review can be extended into a full systematic review rather than repeated.
A predefined question, a recorded search, documented screening and a statement of what was abbreviated. Work that does not meet these requirements is a literature summary and should be described as one.
We will tell you clearly if a deadline would compress the work to the point where it can no longer be described as a rapid review.
Related Services
Related Research Services
Rapid reviews are one of several review types, each suited to a different question and timescale.
1IF MORE TIME IS AVAILABLEfull review methods
Systematic reviewComprehensive, dual-screened and registered reviews. Living systematic reviewReviews updated as new evidence is published.2IF THE FIELD HAS NOT BEEN MAPPEDmap the evidence first
Scoping reviewThe extent of existing evidence and where it ends. Evidence gap mapVisual maps of evidence gaps for a research portfolio.3IF IT IS FOR A PAYER OR A REGULATORpayer and regulatory reviews
Payer evidence reviewEvidence reviews prepared for HTA assessors. State-of-the-art reviewFor medical device clinical evaluations.Request a Free Rapid Review Scoping Assessment
We assess your question before quoting and will tell you if a smaller review would meet your needs.