Skip to main content Accessibility help

Adaptive Evolution in Rapid Assessments: A 25-Year Perspective

  • Paula Corabian (a1), Bing Guo (a1), Carmen Moga (a1) and N. Ann Scott (a1)



This article retrospectively examines the evolution of rapid assessments (RAs) produced by the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Program at the Institute of Health Economics over its 25-year relationship with a single requester, the Alberta Health Ministry (AHM).


The number, types, and methodological attributes of RAs produced over the past 25 years were reviewed. The reasons for developmental changes in RA processes and products over time were charted to document the push–pull tension between AHM needs and the HTA Program's drive to meet those needs while responding to changing methodological benchmarks.


The review demonstrated the dynamic relationship required for HTA researchers to meet requester needs while adhering to good HTA practice. The longstanding symbiotic relationship between the HTA Program and the AHM initially led to increased diversity in RA types, followed by controlled extinction of the less fit (useful) “transition species.” Adaptations in RA methodology were mainly driven by changes in best practice standards, requester needs, the healthcare environment, and staff expertise and technology.


RAs are a useful component of HTA programs. To remain relevant and useful, RAs need to evolve according to need within the constraints of HTA best practice.


Corresponding author

Author for correspondence: Paula Corabian, E-mail:


Hide All
1.Hailey, D, Corabian, P, Harstall, C, Schneider, W (2000) The use and impact of rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 16, 651656.
2.Khangura, S, Polisena, J, Farrah, K, Kamel, C (2014) Rapid review: An emerging approach to evidence synthesis in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 30, 2027.
3.Khangura, S, Konnyu, K, Cushman, R, Grimshaw, J, Moher, D (2012) Evidence summaries: The evolution of a rapid review approach. Syst Rev 1, 10.
4.Polisena, J, Garritty, C, Kamel, C, Stevens, A, Abou-Setta, AM (2015) Rapid review programs to support health care and policy decision making: A descriptive analysis of processes and methods. Syst Rev 4, 26.
5.Kelly, SE, Moher, D, Clifford, TJ (2016) Expediting evidence synthesis for healthcare decision-making: Exploring attitudes and perceptions towards rapid reviews using Q methodology. Peer J 4, e2522. eCollection 2016.
6.Hartling, L, Guise, JM, Kato, E, et al. A taxonomy of rapid reviews links report types and methods to specific decision-making contexts. J Clin Epidemiol 68, 14511462.
7.Watt, A, Cameron, A, Sturm, L, et al. (2008) Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: An inventory of current methods and practice in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 24, 133139.
8.Tricco, AC, Zarin, W, Antony, J, et al. (2016) An international survey and modified Delphi approach revealed numerous rapid review methods. J Clin Epidemiol 70, 6167.
9.Busse, R, Orvain, J, Velasco, M, et al. (2002) Best practice in undertaking and reporting health technology assessments: Working Group 4 report. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 18, 361422.
10.Borowski, HZ, Brehaut, J, Hailey, D. (2007) Linking evidence from health technology assessments to policy and decision making: the Alberta model. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 23, 155161.


Adaptive Evolution in Rapid Assessments: A 25-Year Perspective

  • Paula Corabian (a1), Bing Guo (a1), Carmen Moga (a1) and N. Ann Scott (a1)


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed