Objectives: In 2019 we invented the 2-week systematic review (2weekSR) methodology, to complete full, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic reviews in approximately 2 weeks. Since then we have continued to develop and adapt the 2weekSR methodology for completing larger and more complex systematic reviews, including less experienced or inexperienced team members.
Study design and setting: For ten 2weekSRs, we collected data on (1) systematic review characteristics; (2) systematic review teams; and (3) time to completion and publication. We have also continued to develop new tools and integrate them into the 2weekSR processes.
Results: The 10 2weekSRs addressed intervention, prevalence, and utilization questions, and included a mix of randomized and observational studies. Reviews involved screening from 458 to 5,471 references, and included between 5 and 81 studies. The median team size was 6. Most reviews (7/10) included team members with limited systematic review experience; three included team members with no prior experience. Reviews required a median of 11 workdays (range: 5-20) and 17 calendar days (range: 5-84) to complete; time from journal submission to publication ranged from 99 to 260 days.
Conclusion: The 2weekSR methodology scales with review size and complexity, offering a considerable time-saving over traditionally conducted systematic reviews without relying on methodological shortcuts associated with "rapid reviews."
Keywords: 2weekSR; Automation; Evidence synthesis; Methodology; Systematic reviews; Time factors.
Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.