Decision-makers are increasingly recognizing the usefulness of qualitative research to inform patient-centered policy decisions, and are accordingly increasingly demanding qualitative evidence as part of health technology assessment (HTA). In the context of tight HTA timelines, a new form of evidence synthesis has emerged—rapid qualitative reviews. The need for rapidity requires either an increase in resources or, more commonly, a compromise in rigor, yet guidance on appropriate compromises for qualitative reviews is lacking.

In order to inform de novo guidance, we conducted a systematic scoping review to identify existing guidance and published examples of rapid qualitative reviews. We searched Medline and CINAHL using medical subject headings and keywords related to “rapid reviews” and “qualitative” research, and screened the 1,771 resultant citations independently in duplicate. Additionally, we searched the grey literature and solicited examples from our contacts and other evidence-synthesis organizations. We summarized included guidance and reviews using the Search, AppraisaL, Synthesis, Analysis (SALSA) framework to identify abbreviations in the review process.

We found no guidance documents specific to rapid qualitative reviews. We found one published peer-reviewed rapid qualitative review, and several more (>10; grey literature search in process) through our organizational contacts. While methods to abbreviate the process are poorly reported, an abbreviated literature search (years and databases searched) and the use of a single reviewer appear common.

A number of agencies are producing rapid qualitative reviews, however our review identifies the urgent need to develop and explore methods for the synthesis of qualitative research that balance rapidity and rigor.