The importance of linking evidence into practice and policy is recognised as a key pillar of a prudent approach to healthcare; it is of importance to healthcare professionals and decision-makers across the world in every speciality. However, rapid access to evidence to support service redesign, or to change practice at pace, is challenging. This is particularly so in smaller specialties such as Palliative Care, where pressured multidisciplinary clinicians lack time and skill sets to locate and appraise the literature relevant to a particular area. Therefore, we have initiated the Palliative Care Evidence Review Service (PaCERS), a knowledge transfer partnership through which we have developed a clear methodology to conduct evidence reviews to support professionals and other decision-makers working in palliative care.PaCERS methodology utilises modified systematic review methods as there is no agreed definition or an accepted methodology for conducting rapid reviews. This paper describes the stages involved based on our iterative recent experiences and engagement with stakeholders, who are the potential beneficiaries of the research. Uniquely, we emphasise the process and opportunities of engagement with the clinical workforce and policy-makers throughout the review, from developing and refining the review question at the start through to the importance of demonstrating impact. We are faced with the challenge of the trade-off between the timely transfer of evidence against the risk of impacting on rigour. To address this issue, we try to ensure transparency throughout the review process. Our methodology aligns with key principles of knowledge synthesis in defining a process that is transparent, robust and improving the efficiency and timeliness of the review.Our reviews are clinically or policy driven and, although we use modified systematic review methods, one of the key differences between published review processes and our review process is in our relationship with the requester. This streamlining approach to synthesising evidence in a timely manner helps to inform decisions faced by clinicians and decision-makers in healthcare settings, supporting, at pace, knowledge transfer and mobilisation.

中文翻译：

---

姑息治疗证据审查服务（PaCERS）：知识转移伙伴关系。

将证据结合到实践和政策中的重要性被认为是审慎的医疗保健方法的关键支柱。对于每个专业领域的全球医疗保健专业人员和决策者而言，这一点都很重要。但是，快速获得证据以支持服务重新设计或按时更改实践是具有挑战性的。在较小的专业（例如姑息治疗）中尤其如此，受压的多学科临床医生缺乏时间和技能来定位和评估与特定领域相关的文献。因此，我们启动了姑息治疗证据审查服务（PaCERS），这是一种知识转移合作伙伴关系，通过该服务，我们开发了一种清晰的方法来进行证据审查，以支持从事姑息治疗工作的专业人员和其他决策者。由于没有商定的定义或公认的进行快速审核的方法，因此PaCERS方法采用了经过修改的系统审核方法。本文根据我们反复的最新经验以及与利益相关者的互动来描述所涉及的阶段，而利益相关者是研究的潜在受益者。独特的是，我们强调在整个审查过程中与临床工作人员和决策者互动的过程和机会，从一开始就制定和完善审查问题，一直到展示影响力的重要性。我们面临着在及时转移证据与影响严格性风险之间进行权衡的挑战。为了解决此问题，我们尝试确保整个审核过程的透明度。我们的方法与知识合成的关键原则相一致，定义了一个透明，稳健的流程并提高了审查的效率和及时性。我们的审查是临床或政策驱动的，尽管我们使用改良的系统审查方法，但其中的主要区别之一已发布的审阅过程与我们的审阅过程之间的关系在于我们与请求者的关系。这种及时合成证据的简化方法有助于为临床医生和决策者在医疗机构中面临的决策提供信息，并支持他们的步调，知识转移和动员。已发布的审阅过程与我们的审阅过程之间的主要区别之一是我们与请求者的关系。这种及时合成证据的简化方法有助于为临床医生和决策者在医疗机构中面临的决策提供信息，并支持他们的步调，知识转移和动员。已发布的审阅过程与我们的审阅过程之间的主要区别之一是我们与请求者的关系。这种及时合成证据的简化方法有助于为临床医生和决策者在医疗机构中面临的决策提供信息，并支持他们的步调，知识转移和动员。