- Conflict of Interest (COI) Policy Revision
- Author Charter
- Editorial Charter
- High-profile reviews
- Ibero-American Centre author mentoring
Review Production portfolio
- CRG Networks Innovation Fund
- Editorial Management System Project (EMS) evaluation
- Update Classification System publication
- Fast-Track Service
Project Lead: Ruth Foxlee, Senior Programme Manager
Objective: To implement the Cochrane revised COI policy.
The Governing Board approved Cochrane’s revised Conflict of Interest Policy on February 27th and it was announced on the March 16th. The policy will come into effect on October 1st 2020. Any new reviews registered or review updates that begin after this date will have to adhere to the 2020 policy. Reviews that were underway before October 1st must adhere to the 2014 policy. This long lead time will give Cochrane Review Groups, authors and editors, time to familiarise themselves with the new policy and for the PRD/ITS teams to implement vital system changes to improve and streamline current declaration of interest processes.
A new Conflict of Interest portal is now available, providing:
- Details of the revision process and supporting documents
- Access the 2020 and 2014 policies
- Details of any training events and sign-up links
- Information about the COI Arbiters
With this policy revision we recognized the need to review our current CoI governance structures and COI case referral processes. We have revised the Terms of Reference that govern the COI arbiters and panel and updated the COI case management workflow. These changes will be announced to the Cochrane community in June 2020 and will come into effect at the same time as the launch of the policy in October 2020.
Project Lead: Rachel Marshall
Develop an author charter that describes agreed expectations between authors and Cochrane Review Groups to assure the equity and consistently high quality of the review process.
Project Lead: Rachel Marshall
Develop an editorial charter that describes agreed expectations across Networks and Cochrane Review Groups to assure the equity and consistently high quality of editorial processes.
Project Lead: Rachel Marshall
To develop and implement an agreed quality assurance process for high-profile reviews.
Update (April 9 2019): The draft identification criteria and a quality assurance management process have been developed by December 2018. An advisory group consisting of representatives from the community was convened and feedback on the documents was completed by January 2019 and presented to the Editorial and Governing Boards.
The next steps involve finalising the documents with the feedback from the Editorial and Governing Boards’ feedback and sending for sign off to the Editor in Chief. Hold the first teleconference with the Advisory Group and agree on an implementation, roll-out plan with the community for new reviews. The proposed plan for implementation is news item with links to the criteria, process and registration form on the community website, followed by three webinars across 3 different time-zones. The Advisory Group will meet every quarter going forward to access new submissions.
Project Lead: Sera Tort, Clinical Editor
A joint project between EMD and Cochrane Ibero-America to support four author teams by providing mentoring in their own language, including linguistic and methods support.
Update 19 June 2020:
The 2019 workplan for the current Content Strategy, in line with the objectives of the Strategy to 2020, included six key projects:
- Explore the feasibility of clinical study reports (CSRs) as a data source in Cochrane Reviews
- Scale-up living systematic reviews
- Scale up network meta-analysis and define standards
- Scale-up prognosis reviews
- Implement the Risk of Bias 2 tool
- Explore the feasibility of rapid reviews within Cochrane
Much has been achieved in each of these areas, which has been updated under the headings below with a summary of ongoing and future work. The unfortunate successive cancellation of strategic meetings and the Methods Team’s involvement in Cochrane’s response to COVID-19 have prevented key discussions and work to inform the Methods/Content Strategy. From June, the EMD Methods Team will be taking stock of what has been learned and achieved during implementation of the current Content Strategy and the response to COVID-19 to define future directions, objectives and workplans.
Clinical Study Reports
Explore the feasibility of using clinical study reports (CSRs) as the main source of data in Cochrane drug intervention reviews. If it is confirmed as feasible, three exemplar reviews should be initiated before the end of 2019.
Update 19 June 2020: Consultation in 2019 highlighted that using CSRs is feasible and at least five Cochrane Reviews planning to use them are underway. Resources were collated and a Clinical Study Report Working Group formed to support these review teams, and the EMD Methods Team will work with them to understand the challenges first-hand. Discussions to facilitate CSR access with regulatory bodies and data sharing platform have been initiated, Cochrane Germany held a CSR Methods Symposium in February 2020, and a number of advocacy activities have supported open access and use of CSRs.
Create an infrastructure to support living systematic reviews across all Networks.
Update 18 June 2020: The need to support frequent updating of key reviews during the COVID-19 crisis has brought the Living Systematic Reviews (LSR) project to the forefront of the agenda. The LSR Network are informing a Living Review and versioning project to progress the editorial and publishing processes required to support these reviews. The Living Evidence Network continue to support review teams with LSRs and have developed relevant guidance and training. Research is also underway on tech enablers for LSRs, implications for KT and language translation, supporting consumer engagement and supporting living guidelines.
Develop standards and scaling up of Network Meta-analysis (NMA).
Update 19 June 2020: A series of Learning Live webinars were delivered between November 2019 and May 2020, version 6 of the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions launched with a chapter dedicated to NMA, developments of the CINeMA app are underway and a Cochrane interactive learning module has been launched. The Methods Support Unit (MSU) are developing a protocol template and set of methodological expectations for roll out in 2020.
Publish at least six Prognosis Review exemplars to streamline working arrangements between Cochrane Review Groups and the Prognosis Methods Group, and ensure editors and authors have the necessary guidance and support to design, conduct, report and assess prognosis reviews.
Update 18 June 2020: The process of scaling up Prognosis Reviews is well underway, with four published and 25 underway. Key developments to facilitate Prognosis Reviews in Cochrane include the development of templates for protocols, full reviews and peer review, in-person and online training resources, guidance on different steps in conducting Prognosis Reviews and the development of tools to support prognosis methods. This has been led by the Prognosis Methods Group and is supported by a network of prognosis review experts who are involved in peer review, training and developing the resources to support Prognosis Reviews in Cochrane.
Define a Cochrane Rapid Review, conduct methods research on vital points concerning the validity of rapid reviews, and determine the utility of rapid reviews in Cochrane.
Update 19 June 2020: The pace of the COVID-19 situation required timely answers and expedited processes, which led to the initiation of a Rapid Review service and the first Cochrane Rapid Reviews being published on the Cochrane Library. Work undertaken and interim recommendations made by the Rapid Reviews Methods Group (RRMG) have informed the work so far and templates, methods, and editorial processes will continue to be developed and evaluated in 2020. A Learning Live webinar to introduce the process and methods was delivered in April 2020.
Risk of Bias 2
Support the implementation Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) in all new Cochrane intervention Reviews that include randomized controlled trials initiated from 1 January 2020.
Update 18 June 2020: A phased implementation of RoB 2 is underway with 23 Cochrane Reviews in the pilot and an additional 38 in discussion to join. Key developments to facilitate the introduction of RoB 2 in Cochrane include the launch of version 6 of the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions, detailed guidance from the Risk of Bias tools team, guidance on reporting considerations for protocols and reviews, guidance on using RevMan Web with RoB 2, a three-day, in-person training event for Cochrane Review Groups, ensuring RoB 2 compliance with Cochrane Interactive Learning, launching a Learning Live webinar series, RoB 2 tools and updates to data collection tools. The Methods Support Unit and EMD Methods Team, supported by the Bias Methods Group, are working closely with the author teams and CRG staff with Reviews in the pilot to ensure they have the support they need to use RoB 2 accurately and build methodological expertise within the CRGs and Networks.
Project Leads: Kayleigh Kew, Senior Methods Editor & Kerry Dwan, Statistical Editor and Methods Support Unit Lead.
Establish a Methods Team to provide support to Cochrane Review Group Networks.
Update 18 June 2020: The Methods Support Unit (MSU) was launched officially in October 2019. The MSU team is led by Kerry Dwan (Statistical Editor and MSU Lead), and includes a Methodology Editor (Tess Moore) and an Epidemioloy Editor (Andy Anglemyer). The team works closely with Cochrane Review Groups (CRG) and CRG Network staff to improve the consistency and methodological quality of Cochrane Reviews and provides a broad range of support, peer review and training for established and more complex methods. Information about how to request support from the MSU can be found here.
The MSU responded to a total of 253 queries from all eight CRG Networks between October 2019 and June 2020. Requests most commonly relate to network meta-analyses, RoB2, non-randomised studies of interventions, and complex issues in standard intervention reviews. In the future, the MSU hopes to use the type and nature of requests it sees to identify common errors and provide targeted training to improve the exemplary use of both standard and more complex methods in Cochrane Reviews.
Project Leads: Toby Lasserson, Deputy Editor in Chief and Rachel Marshall, Senior Editorial Officer.
Manage a fund which will support review production and/or editorial procedures that lead to harmonization of processes and improvements in content or quality across the CRG Networks and the Cochrane Library.
Update (April 9 2019): The following project milestones have been completed:
- The CRG Networks Innovation fund proposal was launched in February 2019 with acceptance of submissions until mid-April 2019.
- Evaluation criteria have been developed and an advisory group convened to evaluate applications.
Advisory group members will evaluate the submissions and successful applicants will be notified in May 2019.
Editorial Management System Project (EMS) evaluation
Project Lead: Harriet MacLehose, Senior Editor, Publishing Strategy and Gert van Valkenhoef, ITS Manager
Project Sponsor: Chris Mavergames, Head of ITS/CIO
Project Board: Paul Garner, Toby Lasserson, Dan Shanahan, Marlene Stewart, Rachael Kelly, Chris Mavergames (Project Sponsor), Karla Soares-Weiser, Elizabeth Stovold
Contact: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Cochrane is currently reviewing the editorial management systems used by our editors and authors to prepare Cochrane Reviews, and the other content published in the Cochrane Library.
Cochrane uses several editorial management systems (EMS) to manage its content. The primary system used for Cochrane Reviews is Archie, which was developed in-house in 2003. Limited investment in recent years has caused Archie to fall behind the technological curve and the system does not meet all the desires of our users. The EMS marketplace has evolved since 2003.
Cochrane needs to find or develop a sustainable editorial management solution that will serve the needs of our audience and contributors. The time to evaluate our technical needs and options is now.
Cochrane requires an EMS that meets user needs, accommodates different content types, and is sustainable. This programme of work forms part of an organizational Target in 2019 which aims to evaluate, plan and begin implementation of an improved editorial management solution for Cochrane Review production.
Update (19 December 2019): Origin Editorial has helped Cochrane to document stakeholder requirements, assess the potential for Archie to meet these requirements, and identify potential external systems that could meet these requirements. This phase of work is now complete with the key decisions:
- Cochrane will not continue to develop its own EMS, and the editorial management parts of Archie will be decommissioned. (The other Archie functions will be reviewed separately.)
- Cochrane will explore a small number of commercial EMS providers in more detail, with the aim of selecting one for implementation.
Cochrane's programme of work to review, evaluate, select, and implement a new EMS started this year and will extend into 2020 and beyond. This programme will also look at the linked production systems used to deliver content from the EMS to the publisher platform for the Cochrane Library. A combined review will ensure these systems are complementary and work efficiently together.
This project is now closed, and new projects are planned for the next stages in the programme of work.
Project Lead: Harriet MacLehose, Senior Editor, Publishing Strategy
The Updating Classification System (UCS) guides readers as to whether a Cochrane Review is up to date, likely to be updated in future, or does not need updating currently. It can also help Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) prioritize individual reviews. The current version of the UCS was published in 2014 after a consensus workshop in Canada on updating systematic reviews. CRG staff can apply this to reviews in Archie; see guidance. The decision framework asks about the usage and currency of the review question, the availability of new studies or information, and the impact of new information on the review; and also whether new methods will affect the review. We were unable to publish this information alongside the reviews on the old Cochrane Library platform, but with the new platform released in August 2018, we are now in a position to start the publication.
The Editor in Chief and Editorial Board approved the start of publication of UCS information in December 2018. A project was set up to ensure that the publication criteria were agreed and met, and that support and training is available to all CRG teams. Our goal is for all CRGs to have started publishing the ‘update status’ for published Cochrane Reviews (intervention and DTA) – as a minimum all reviews published in 2018/19 – by the end of 2019.
Update (7 February 2020): This project is paused and a further update is planned for March 2020. An interim message was circulated to Cochrane editorial teams on 7 February 2020.
Project Leads: Toby Lasserson, Deputy Editor in Chief and Rachel Marshall
To publish up to three high priority reviews per CRG Network within a timeframe of 12-19 weeks.
Update (April 9 2019): Since its launch in September 2018 we have received 14 enquires, have published two reviews (from the Acute and Emergency Care Network) within 12 and 17 weeks respectively and have three reviews in progress. We have also rejected four applications based on our acceptance criteria. We have also developed checklists and templates to ensure the editorial process is as efficient as possible.
Project Lead: John Hilton, Senior Editor, Publishing Operations
The Cochrane Library has a system to enable users to submit Comments on articles in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We are currently working to improve the processes and tools by which Comments are managed and published, so that Cochrane Review Groups are able to more rapidly publish Comments on the Cochrane Library. A revised process, workflow, and publishing system has been set up and tested, and there has been further work to make technical improvements. Implementation of the new process and tools is being planned (2 June 2020).