 Rapid reviews are a streamlined version of traditional systematic reviews that aim to synthesize evidence within a shortened time frame, typically six months or less. The process of conducting rapid reviews varies greatly and may involve limited searching, using one reviewer for multiple phases, and accelerating the data extraction process. While these methods can be useful in certain situations, they may also introduce biases and lead to missing relevant information. Further research comparing full systematic reviews with rapid reviews is needed to enhance understanding of their limitations. This article was authored by Saliska Donner, Ganan Rebecca, and Thomas Helen. We are article.tv, links in the description below.