Moulikatou Adouni Lawani|Béatriz Valéra|Émilie Fortier-Brochu|France Légaré|Pierre?Hugues Carmichael|Luc Côté|Philippe Voyer|Edeltraut Kröger|Holly O. Witteman|Charo Rodríguez|Anik Giguère
Five shared decision-making tools in 5 months: use of rapid reviews to develop decision boxes for seniors living with dementia and their caregivers
Université Laval|Université Laval|Université Laval|Université Laval|Université Laval|Université Laval|Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement|Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement|Université Laval|McGill University|Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement
decision support tools build upon comprehensive timely syntheses literature rapid reviews may allow supporting development omitting certain components traditional systematic reviews thus aimed describe rapid review approach underlying development decision support tools ie five decision boxes db shared decisionmaking seniors living dementia caregivers healthcare providers included studies based pico questions participant intervention comparison outcome describing five specific decision gave priority higher quality evidence eg systematic reviews db first identified secondary sources literature namely clinical summaries clinical practice guidelines systematic reviews initial extraction searched primary studies academic databases grey literature fill gaps evidence extracted study designs sample sizes populations probabilities benefitsharms health options single reviewer conducted literature search study selection data extracted one reviewer verified second experienced reviewer two reviewers assessed quality evidence converted probabilities absolute risks ease understanding two five experts validated content db conducted descriptive statistical analyses review processes resources required approach allowed screening limited number references range 104 406review review included 15 26 studies 2 10 health options 11 62 health outcomes conducted 9 47 quality assessments team ten reviewers varying levels expertise supported specific steps information specialist biostatistician graphic designer time required complete rapid review varied 7 31 weeks per review mean sd 19 10 weeks data extraction required time 8 68 weeks average estimated cost rapid review c11646 sd c10914 approach enabled development clinical tools rapidly traditional systematic review future studies evaluate applicability approach teamstools