Response to letter from Dr Riegel and Mr James

Katherine Carleton-Eagleton*, Iain Walker, Nicole Freene, Diane Gibson, Stuart Semple

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review

    Abstract

    ThankyoufortheopportunitytorespondtotheLettertotheEditor from Dr Riegel and Mr James dated 18 February 2021 regarding our recently published paper Meeting support needs for informal caregiversofpeoplewithheartfailure:arapidreview.Weappreciateand respecttheimportanceofacademic discussion and debate, acknowledgingtherewillbedifferencesofopinions. Our paper acknowledged that there are disadvantages and limitations to the use of rapid reviewsprimarily due to the lack of consistent methodology behind the review and thus potential lack of rigorous assessment behind the methodologies utilized.1,2 There are manybenefitstoconductingarapidreview,andithasbeensuggested that a rapid review is a useful method as an initial examination of the evidence.3 Itisnotuncommonforrapidreviewstobeutilizedtohelp determinefutureprioritieswhetheritbeforhealthcarepolicyorclinical interventions,4,5 and this rapid review was undertaken to inform themethodologicalapproachforfutureresearchaspartofabroader researchprogrammebeingledbyAuthor1.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)514
    Number of pages1
    JournalEuropean Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
    Volume20
    Issue number5
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2021

    Cite this