Minutes of Cochrane
Collaboration Steering Group meetings,
[These minutes were
approved by the Steering Group Executive on 28 November 2006.]
Subject |
Item no. |
Allocation
of funds to specific proposals |
19; 34 |
|
17; 37.4 |
|
35 |
Annual
General Meetings, agenda for |
11 |
Author
issues, and proposed survey of Cochrane |
20.2; 33.6 |
Campbell
Collaboration issues |
15.5 |
Cash
flow forecast |
5.2 |
CCNet
issues |
33.4 |
CCSG
review |
4 |
CENTRAL
Vision Group report and recommendations |
19 |
Centre
issues |
33.5 |
Chief
Executive Officer report |
3.1 |
Chinese
language, trial search and translation project for trials in the |
27 |
Co-Chair
of the Steering Group, nominations for |
3.4 |
Cochrane Library, derivative products of
The |
37.1 |
Cochrane Library, presentation of reviews
in RevMan 5 in The |
30.2 |
Cochrane Library, publication of The |
9 |
Cochrane Library, rationale for requiring
authors to publish their review first in The |
28 |
Cochrane
Library Users’ Group ( |
32 |
Cochrane
Opportunities Fund |
8 |
Cochrane
Review Group issues |
33.1 |
Cochrane
reviews, quality issues in |
20 |
Colloquia,
dates of future |
17 |
Colloquia,
invitations to host |
17 |
Colloquium
2007 in |
14; 17 |
Colloquium
Manager software |
30.6 |
Colloquium
Policy Advisory Group (CPAG) report |
15.2 |
Consumer
Network issues |
33.4 |
Contract,
timeline and process for renegotiation of Wiley |
7 |
Co-ordinating
Editors’ meeting |
33.1.2 |
|
18 |
CRG
issues |
33.1 |
Declarations
of interest |
2 |
Derivative
products |
37.1 |
Diagnostic
test accuracy, publication arrangements for protocols and reviews of |
20.1 |
Discretionary
Fund expenditure |
10.1 |
Entity
representatives, verbal reports from, after meetings during the Colloquium |
33 |
Environmental
sustainability issues |
10.3; 11; 37.2 |
Feedback
Management Advisory Group ( |
29 |
Field/Network
issues |
33.3 |
Financial
position and cash flow forecast |
5.2 |
Financial
status of the Collaboration and of Cochrane entities |
6 |
|
17 |
Funding
Arbiter, report from the |
15.4 |
Funding,
mechanism for prioritisation projects |
12 |
Funds,
allocation of to specific proposals |
19; 34 |
Handbook
Advisory Group ( |
16.3 |
Information
Management System (IMS), status report on the |
21 |
Information
Management System Group ( |
30.7 |
Information
Management System Group ( |
30 |
Kenneth
Warren Prize 2006 |
10.2 |
La
Biblioteca Cochrane Plus, continuation of |
26 |
Management
Plan, Strategic Plan and |
separate document |
Membership
of the Steering Group’s sub- and advisory groups |
16.1 |
Methods
Group issues |
33.2 |
Mid-year
CCSG meeting, |
17; 37.4 |
Mid-year
CCSG meeting, |
18 |
Mid-year
CCSG meeting, |
17 |
|
15.1 |
Ombudsmen,
report from the |
15.3 |
Opportunities
Fund |
8 |
‘Parent’
database |
30.5 |
Plain
language summaries, summary of findings tables and |
20.3 |
Prioritisation
projects, mechanism for funding |
12 |
Publication
arrangements for Cochrane protocols and reviews of diagnostic test accuracy |
20.1 |
Publication
of The Cochrane Library (Wiley report) |
9 |
Quality
Advisory Group ( |
23.1 |
Quality
issues in Cochrane reviews |
20 |
Rationale
for requiring Cochrane authors to publish in The Cochrane Library first |
28 |
Report
and Financial Statements |
5.1 |
Review
Group Co-ordinators’ meeting |
33.1.1 |
Review
of the Collaboration, Strategic |
13 |
Review
of the Information Management System Group ( |
30.1 |
Review
of the Steering Group |
4 |
Reviews
of diagnostic test accuracy, publication arrangements for protocols and |
20.1 |
RevMan
5, presentation of reviews in The
Cochrane Library |
30.2 |
RevMan
5, status of and release plans |
22; 30.4 |
RGC
issues |
33.1.1 |
São
Paulo Colloquium and CCSG meeting, 2007 |
14; 17 |
Spanish
version of The Cochrane Library, continuation of |
26 |
Spreadsheet
of current financial position and cash flow forecast |
5.2 |
Steering
Group agenda, rationale for having reformatted |
3.2 |
Steering
Group five-year review |
4 |
Steering
Group meeting 2009, invitation to host in |
18 |
Steering
Group meeting, top priorities for |
3.1 |
Steering
Group meetings, dates of future |
17 |
Steering
Group members’ declarations of interest |
2 |
Steering
Group members, statements from and farewell to outgoing |
24 |
Steering
Group sub- and advisory groups, changes in membership of |
16.1 |
Steering
Group, 2009 meeting of the |
18 |
Strategic
discussion in |
35 |
Strategic
Plan and Management Plan |
separate document |
Strategic
review of the Collaboration |
13 |
Summary
of findings tables and plain language summaries |
20.3 |
Survey
of Cochrane authors |
20.2 |
Topics
lists for entities other than CRGs |
30.3 |
Trading
Company Directors, issues raised by |
10.3 |
Treasurer’s
report |
5 |
Trial
search and translation project for trials in Chinese language |
27 |
Trials
Search Co-ordinators’ meeting |
33.1.3 |
TSC
issues |
33.1.3 |
Umbrella
Reviews Working Group (URWG) report |
31 |
Updating
Working Group: pilot project for updating reviews |
23.2 |
|
17 |
Websites
management |
16.2 |
Wiley,
timeline and process for renegotiation of contract |
7 |
Wiley
report (publication of The Cochrane
Library) |
9 |
Minutes of
Cochrane Collaboration
Steering Group meetings,
22 and 26
October 2006
[These minutes were
approved by the Steering Group Executive on 28 November 2006.]
Present: Godwin Aja, Claire Allen (Deputy Administrator), Lorne Becker,
Note: The underlined headings below indicate live
links to the background papers for those agenda items. Only those papers
designated ‘Open access’ are publicly available. If an item is not underlined,
it is because the background paper has been designated ‘Restricted’,
‘Confidential’ or ‘Commercial-in-confidence’.
First Steering Group meeting - 22 October 2006
1. Welcomes, introductions, apologies for absence, and approval
of the agenda
Mark
welcomed everyone to the meeting, and introductions were made. Mark explained
that Steff Lewis had recently resigned as Co-Chair, with effect from 25 October
2006, and was unable to attend this meeting. Formal thanks were recorded for
all Steff’s hard work during her time on the Steering Group, particularly
during the past year as Co-Chair. The agenda was approved, with one change:
Janet asked for the item on CCNet (item 33.4) to be discussed under Goal 1
(with item 20.3 - Summary of Findings tables and plain language summaries).
Mark thanked everyone for their voluntary work as members of the Steering
Group, recognising the considerable time and effort put in by most of them. He
congratulated Lorne for having been elected to take over from Mark as Co-Chair,
with effect from 25 October 2006.
2. Steering Group members’ declarations of interest
Mark drew
attention to the declarations of interest that had been circulated with the
agenda material, and are appended to these minutes. (Steering Group members’
declarations are updated on a quarterly basis and published in The Cochrane Library.) Mark explained
that Monica was attending the meeting to represent the Trading Company
Directors as well as in her capacity as Director of the Information Management
System. Jon reported that he had recently received a five-year grant from the
Department of Health in
3. 3.1 Introduction
and top priorities for this meeting: Mark referred to
the achievements of the past year, including the new interface of The Cochrane Library. The national
provision for
3.2 Rationale for having reformatted
the Steering Group agenda: Lorne explained that agenda items had been
sorted according to their relevance to the four goals of the Strategic Plan.
This was to allow related items to be
discussed together, and to make it easier to identify any gaps. The
reasoning behind the ‘consent’ agenda items was to separate out the items that would normally be approved with little comment or were for information
only, in order to allow more time
for those items requiring discussion. Also, all agenda items
with a financial component had been put on the agenda twice, so that towards
the end of the meeting they could be considered together, after each project had been
discussed on its individual merits.
3.3 The way the Steering Group
works: See item 3.1 above.
3.4 Nominations for Co-Chair of the Steering Group (see
also item 16.1): A Co-Chair was needed to complete the remaining year of
Steff Lewis’ two-year term. Adrian Grant had been nominated, and had accepted
the nomination. Jordi chaired the discussion of this item, and asked
4. Review of the Steering
Group
4.1 Recommendations of the review: The
Steering Group discussed the findings and recommendations of the panel, chaired
by Alessandro Liberati (Director of the Italian Cochrane Centre), which had
recently completed the five-yearly review of the Steering Group. The panel’s
main recommendations dealt with the role of the Steering Group in general; its
role in improving the quality and relevance of Cochrane reviews; its role in
securing funding and financial planning, and in ensuring effective
communication; the composition of the Steering Group and entity representation;
executive functions, including the role of the Secretariat and the Chief
Executive Officer; the Steering Group’s relationships with external
organisations (although this had not been addressed, due to shortage of time);
and the need for and frequency of reviews of the Steering Group. Sally said that
this review presented a great opportunity for change where appropriate, but that on some issues there had been quite a high rate of
non-response or of “don’t knows”. There was agreement to putting the
panel’s report onto the website and inviting people’s comments, to be fielded
and collated by the panel to ensure ongoing independence from the Steering
Group.
No clear
recommendations had been made about the composition of the Steering Group,
since entities had been more focussed on the issue of communication with their
own representative on the Group. Skills in the Secretariat that might be
lacking were the packaging and dissemination of information; also the ability
to foster and motivate entities’ involvement in various activities of the
Collaboration; also fund-raising and grant writing skills. The review panel had
recommended that the Steering Group should be more proactive in establishing
collaborative relationships with external organisations. Some of the issues
addressed in the review should be considered as hypotheses needing further
testing, rather than firm conclusions; it was agreed that it would be helpful
for Alessandro to indicate which recommendations fit into which category. There
had been support for continuing to conduct regular reviews of the Steering
Group on a five-yearly basis. The issue of separation of micro-management from
policy setting is already being addressed.
4.2 Terms of reference and
conduct of the review: Alessandro Liberati then joined the meeting
(for items 4.2 and 4.3 only). He reminded everyone of the terms of reference of
this review. He was pleased that the Steering Group were happy for the report
to be made widely available. He clarified that input from the Chief Executive
Officer had been taken after the report had been written, and suggested that
the report needed several minor amendments before it was made public.
Seventy-seven per cent of entities (over 200 people) had responded to the
review questionnaire.
4.3 Implementation
of the review panel’s recommendations: Alessandro
strongly recommended that an action plan be devised at the next
Steering Group meeting in
4.4 Dissemination of the report on the review:
Jini was asked to prompt Alessandro to circulate an updated version of the
report to all entities as soon as possible after the Colloquium, inviting
people to send their comments on the recommendations to him, in order to
maintain the appropriate distance between the review panel and the subject of
the review, i.e. the Steering Group. Jini should then arrange to make the
report available on the website as well.
Action: Jini
4.5 Clarification
of certain recommendations: The Steering Group accepted the broad
recommendations of the report in principle, whilst agreeing that further
consideration of the detail would be needed. Feedback should be sought from
entities before deciding whether and how to implement each of the recommendations,
and some key performance indicators should be identified. Recommendation 3,
about how the role of the proposed editor-in-chief would relate to that of the
Co-Chairs and the Secretariat staff, particularly the Chief Executive Officer,
needed careful consideration (see item 35). Nick would prepare a discussion
paper as to implementation of the recommendations, and would rely on the
Steering Group and others to contribute actively to the more detailed contents
of his paper. This item should be on the agenda of the Executive teleconference
on 11 January 2007, and the review panel’s report should be discussed within
advisory groups and with constituents in the meantime.
Action: Nick, Adrian, Diana
5. Report from the
Treasurer:
5.1 Report
and Financial Statements: The draft Report and Financial Statements had been circulated to all
entities in advance of the Annual General Meeting (AGM), and would be ratified
at the AGM on 25 October 2006 and put on the website shortly thereafter. In the
meantime, copies are available on request by e-mailing secretariat@cochrane.org. Jon
reported that, due to the accounting and reporting recommendations of the UK
Charities Commission (‘SORP 2005’) the figures in the Financial Statements for
the financial year 2005-06 were difficult to interpret. Specifically,
expenditure committed to future years is now shown in total against the first
year of its approval. This appears to inflate the commitment in the first year,
and in Financial Statements in future years will make it look as if there is no
subsequent expenditure.
Action: Jini
5.2 Spreadsheet of current financial
position and cash flow forecast: Jon itemised the commitments which had not yet been
included in the cash flow forecast that were for consideration at this meeting
in the context of available funds. Mark stressed the importance of
distinguishing between one-off and continuing funding. Nick spoke of the need
for the Steering Group to be more proactive than reactive in future in
approving new items of expenditure. He was asked to review the contingency
buffer to take account of inflation. Jon explained that he would be showing
graphs during the Annual General Meeting of the total annual sales and
royalties from Wiley, the income rise over the year, and the split of how the
funds had been spent between running costs and initiatives; also the proportion
of funds being spent on the various initiatives as a proportion of the overall
income of the Collaboration.
Action: Nick
Post hoc note: This was Jon’s last
Steering Group meeting as Treasurer, and Donna Gillies was taking over this
responsibility from him at the Annual General Meeting on 25 October. Jon’s
conscientious fulfilment of the duties of Treasurer had been much appreciated,
especially by the Co-Chairs, the Trading Company Directors, the CEO and the
Secretariat Administrator.
6. Overview of financial
status of the Collaboration and of Cochrane entities
This item
was discussed after item 7. Rob spoke to this item, as Co-Convenor of the
Action: Nick
7. Timeline and process for
renegotiation of Wiley contract
Nick spoke to this item, which was discussed before item
6. The Steering Group agreed that seven of the eight objectives in the current
publishing contract had been substantially or fully met, and that the eighth
(translation) remained unfulfilled. In the light of this assessment, there was
agreement to Nick exploring extending the Collaboration’s current publishing
contract with Wiley. He asked Steering Group members to send him suggested
items for inclusion in an extended contract. Jon raised the issue of whether
the additional contracts with Cochrane entities for derivative products also
require renewal at the same time. Nick explained that there is reference to
these products in the contract between the Collaboration and Wiley, but that
each has its own contract as well, with its own expiry date.
Action: Nick
8. Cochrane Opportunities Fund
Jon had
provided a detailed set of criteria for managing this Fund in his background
paper for this meeting. Applications to this Fund, linked to the Strategic
Plan, would be called for at the Annual General Meeting on 25 October, and
submitted by the end of 2006; funding decisions would be made by the end of
February 2007. Further details still needed to be worked out and would be
disseminated in late November. Nick would draw up a ‘Request for Proposals’
(RFP) template for use when seeking proposals from entities (see also item 12,
‘Mechanism for funding Cochrane prioritisation projects’). The Steering Group
would assess how this process was working at their next full meeting in
Action: Jon, Nick, Lorne, Adrian
9. Publication of The Cochrane Library
This item
was discussed after item 5, so that Deborah Dixon and
Action: Deborah PG
10. 10.1 Discretionary Fund expenditure: A table of discretionary
fund expenditure to date had been provided with the background materials for
this meeting, for information only.
10.2 Kenneth Warren Prize 2006: A background document had
been provided, giving the name of the author who would receive this year’s
Kenneth Warren Prize, the title of the review, and the amount of funds
remaining in the Kenneth Warren Prize account, for information only.
10.3 Issues raised by the Trading Company
Directors: The Directors had provided a brief background document which needed no
discussion. They had drawn attention in this document to the fact that the
financial situation of the Collaboration looked healthy, and that the challenge
was to see that this income continued to be put to good use in furtherance of
the Charity’s objectives. They also said they believed that environmental
sustainability issues had substantial implications for the Collaboration, and
had agreed that this should be a standing item on future Trading Company
Directors’ meeting agendas. Each meeting would therefore include an opportunity
to consider the potential environmental impact of any decisions made during
that meeting.
11. Agenda for Annual
General Meetings (AGMs)
The agenda
for the AGMs of the charity and the trading company was approved, and the
process of running those meetings was briefly discussed and agreed to. Jini was
asked to ensure that environmental sustainability became a standing item on
future Steering Group agendas.
Action: Jini
12. Mechanism for funding
Cochrane prioritisation projects
Deborah Dixon and Deborah
Pentesco-Gilbert (John Wiley & Sons) were present at the meeting for this
item. There was discussion of the document that Lorne had provided on a mechanism
for funding projects via a competitive call for proposals issued to all
entities, and his recommendations were approved in principle. A maximum limit
of 100,000 GBP was set, for approximately four or five projects. Liz, Lisa and
Peter agreed to be members of a sub-group to consider applications to this
Fund. Lorne and Adrian, as Co-Chairs, would suggest additional members.
Action: Liz, Lisa, Peter
13. Strategic review of The Cochrane Collaboration
Nick explained that Jeremy Grimshaw, Director of the Canadian Cochrane
Centre, had indicated that he would be willing to lead the strategic review of
The Cochrane Collaboration, which the Steering Group had agreed to at its
meeting in Khon Kaen in April 2006, and this was fully supported by the
Steering Group. Jeremy would not be able to commence the strategic review
before May 2007. He should separate out the aims of the strategic review from
the recommendations made in the report of the recent five-yearly review of the
Steering Group. A budget of 75,000 GBP was approved for this strategic review,
for items such as administrative support, travel, and focus groups. Nick would
ask Jeremy and his team to report on the results of this review to the Steering
Group meeting during the Freiburg Colloquium in October 2008. In the meantime,
Jeremy should provide regular reports to the Steering Group on the progress of
the review. This should be a standing item on the agenda of future meetings of
the Steering Group Executive.
Action: Nick, Adrian, Diana
14. São Paulo Colloquium, 21-25 October 2007
The Steering Group discussed the plans for next year’s Colloquium, and
Nick undertook to discuss those plans further with the Co-Convenors of the
Colloquium Policy Advisory Group.
Action: Nick
15. Reports to the Steering
Group:
15.1
Action: Sally, Lorne, Nick
15.2 Colloquium Policy
Advisory Group (CPAG): The revisions to the Colloquium sponsorship policy were approved, making explicit the circumstances under which all forms of sponsorship,
whether from public or commercial sources, are permitted. Jordi was asked to convey
the Steering Group’s approval of the revised Colloquium sponsorship policy to
the CPAG, and Jini was asked to insert the revised policy into the Cochrane
Manual. The CPAG should explore low-cost and environmentally sustainable
alternatives such as participation via the web, holding Colloquia every two years
instead of annually; regional meetings could perhaps replace
Colloquia in alternate years. Lisa raised concerns, shared by many, that
holding Colloquia less frequently could seriously decrease their impact and
lose momentum. Lorne
spoke about the potential for negative impacts on the work of the organisation by focussing too
much on this one issue which is not a part of the Collaboration’s Strategic Plan.
It was, however, noted that the Strategic Plan is not set in stone. The options for
individual rather than organisational approaches, such as the purchase of carbon credits to offset the environmental damage due to air
travel, should be considered. Jordi was asked to request the CPAG to list and
consider the available options in its report to the Steering Group for their meeting
in
Action: Jordi, Jini
15.3 The Ombudsmen: In response to a question
from the Ombudsmen, the Steering
Group acknowledged that conflict management does take place elsewhere than
within the Ombudsman process, particularly within Cochrane Centres and the
Secretariat. Mark agreed to encourage the Ombudsmen to investigate how much
take-up there would be for a workshop on conflict management at next year’s
Colloquium in
Action: Mark
15.4 The Funding Arbiter: Lisa
thanked Claire [Allen] for the support she had been providing to the Funding
Arbitration Panel. The additional budget of approximately 3482 GBP in the
current financial year was approved, to allow for completing the audit of The Cochrane Library.
Action: Lisa
15.5
Action: Nick
16. 16.1 Changes in
membership of the Steering Group’s sub- and advisory groups: The
changes in membership of these groups had been agreed with individual Steering
Group members before the meeting, and should now be reflected in the appendix
to the ‘Structure, remit and membership of groups accountable to the Steering
Group’ on the Collaboration website and on the appropriate mailing lists. It
was agreed that there should be an election as soon as possible for a
Co-ordinating Editor to replace Adrian in that capacity, now that he was about
to replace Steff Lewis as Co-Chair (see item 3.4 above). This person would
serve a term of approximately two and a half years on the Steering Group,
depending on the date of their election, i.e. would step down at the Annual
General Meeting in October 2009. This is so as to ensure continuity, since
Peter Tugwell, the other Co-ordinating Editor representative on the Steering
Group, is due to step down in October 2008.
Action: Claire
16.2 Websites management:
The
progress report provided by Dave Booker, Cochrane Web Team Manager, was noted;
his hard work was appreciated. His recommendation was accepted, that the
Steering Group take a decision on future web management funding for the years
2008 to 2010 at their meeting in Amsterdam in April 2007.
Action: Nick
16.3 Handbook Advisory Group (
16.4 Strategic Plan and Management
Plan: The Steering Group had agreed in Khon Kaen in April 2006 that this
document should be provided as background for all future Steering Group
meetings. Nick had customised a special software program to track the progress
that had been made towards achieving the goals of the Strategic Plan. He had
demonstrated this software to most members of the Steering Group individually
over the past few months, and would continue to do so and to keep it up to
date.
Action: Nick
17. Dates of future Steering
Group meetings and Colloquia
The dates
of the next four Steering Group meetings were noted:
Action: Jini
18. Invitation to host the
2009 mid-year meetings in
The
invitation by Peter Gøtzsche,
Director of the Nordic Cochrane Centre, to host the mid-year meetings in
Action: Rob, Jini
19. CENTRAL
Vision Group report and recommendations (see also item 34)
Deborah
Dixon and Deborah Pentesco-Gilbert (John Wiley & Sons) were present at the
meeting for this item. Karen Robinson and
Interim measures to update
CENTRAL were put forward and agreed. A liaison person needed to be identified;
the timeline put forward by Wiley should be decided upon, and the process
should be worked out that should be followed if a Cochrane Review Group (CRG)
does not submit their specialised register, or submits it in an unacceptable
format. Deborah PG reported that Wiley had carried out a technical assessment
of the task and agreed to take it on as an additional investment. This interim
measure would take effect for at least the next five issues of The Cochrane Library. The CVG
recommended that the interim liaison person should be a TSC with substantial
experience of the issues. Karen confirmed that other sorts of studies, such as
studies of diagnostic test accuracy, could be included in the proposed
centralised register, but there had been no consideration as to whether the
diagnostic test accuracy register or the methodology studies register should be
included. Rob read out an e-mail from a Centre staff member calling for further
consultation with the Co-ordinating Editors and TSCs. A major concern of the
CVG had been to maintain the high profile of the register. Mark thanked Karen
and Gail for the enormous amount of work they had done as members of the CVG,
for their report, and for coming to the meeting. He also thanked Deborah D and
Deborah PG for joining the discussion, and for offering to implement the
interim measures. These four people then left the meeting.
The resource implications were then considered (see also item 34). The interim
measures as proposed were agreed to, together with a budget of 3000 GBP to
support someone to work half a day a week in the interim in a liaison role
between the Collaboration as a whole, the TSCs in particular, and the
publishers.
Action: Nick
20. Quality
issues in Cochrane reviews
Deborah
Dixon and Deborah Pentesco-Gilbert (John Wiley & Sons) were present at the
meeting for this item.
20.1 Publication
arrangements for Cochrane protocols and reviews of diagnostic test accuracy:
Jon
explained the challenges of publishing this type of review. The Steering Group
agreed to pursue the option offered by Wiley of a new ‘derivative’ journal, ‘Cochrane
Diagnostic Reviews’, in which the reviews would be published at the same time
as being published in the Cochrane
Database of Systematic Reviews. The Steering Group agreed to the creation
of an editorial board and to the working arrangement whereby the board would
have to sign off Cochrane Diagnostic Reviews [and protocols]* jointly with the relevant CRG
before they could be published in The
Cochrane Library. The editorial board would be answerable to the
Action: Jon
*Post hoc amendment approved at Steering Group meeting in São Paulo, October 2007
20.2 Survey
of Cochrane authors: Donna
reported that Heather Maxwell and Karen New of the
Action: Donna
20.3 ‘Summary
of Findings’ tables and plain language summaries
This item was discussed in conjunction with agenda item 33.4, the report
provided by Janet Wale on behalf of the Cochrane Consumer Network
(CCNet). Janet explained the work that members of CCNet had been doing on
providing draft plain language summaries for Cochrane reviews, and the fact
that some Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) continued to prefer producing their own
summaries. She drew attention to the fact that some of the summaries that had
been prepared for CRGs had still not appeared in The Cochrane Library. Mark asked the CRG representatives to raise
this issue at entity meetings and to report back to the Steering Group at its
second meeting during the Colloquium; however, this had not been done, and
should be followed up after the Colloquium.
Action: Donna, Dymphna, Hans, Narelle,
Peter, Zbys
The Steering Group then considered a request for funding to support the production
of Summary of Findings tables for 500 existing reviews as a way to get their
implementation started. Mark explained that Andy Oxman, Paul Glasziou and
others had done a great deal of work on devising Summary of Findings tables.
Also, Lorne explained the intention of incorporating similar tables into
umbrella reviews. Sally reported that advice on Summary of Findings tables would
be included in the updated Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. It
was pointed out that methodologists and the Handbook Advisory Group have yet to
sign off on this, and that there has been limited input to date from authors
and CRG editorial teams. Deborah PG explained that Wiley had offered to mount
some usability testing of these tables, and she was encouraged to follow this
up with Andy, Paul and colleagues. The Steering Group decided against funding
the proposal in its current format, and recommended conducting an assessment
and evaluation to include the tables’ acceptability, methodology and usability
among target groups (end users), before being convinced that the format of
these tables as presented in this paper is appropriate for inclusion in The Cochrane Library.
Action: Sally, Jon
Items 21, 22
and 23 were discussed at the second Steering Group meeting.
24. Statements from, and farewell to, outgoing Steering Group
members
Jordi
said that he was leaving the Steering Group after four years with mixed
emotions. He had found the work extremely interesting and had learnt a great
deal. Mark said he was also leaving the Steering Group with mixed emotions. He
had found being Co-Chair a huge challenge, especially when trying to reconcile diametrically
[utterly] opposed views on many issues. The Steering Group had achieved a lot
in the last few years, and should be justifiably proud of its accomplishments.
He thought the organisation was becoming more mature and that there were some
excellent proposals for change in the pipeline. In particular, he re-emphasised
his belief in the value of abridged print versions of Cochrane reviews. Mark
thanked everyone on the Steering Group and in the Secretariat for their
support, especially Jim Neilson and
Second Steering Group meeting - 26 October 2006
Present: Godwin Aja, Claire
Allen (Deputy Administrator), Lorne Becker (Co-Chair; chaired the
second Steering Group meeting),
25. Welcome to Adrian Grant and Joy Oliver
Lorne’s appointment as Co-Chair had been
ratified at the Annual General Meeting on 25 October 2006. His first act as
Co-Chair was to welcome Adrian Grant, also new to the role of Co-Chair, who had
replaced Steff Lewis, also at the Annual General Meeting. Lorne also welcomed
Joy to her first Steering Group meeting as Centre representative. He introduced
Julia Littell, attending the second Steering Group meeting on behalf of The
Campbell Collaboration in place of Bob Boruch.
21. Status report on the
Information Management System (IMS)
In her capacity as Director of the IMS, Monica had provided a detailed progress
report on the IMS, which was for information and needed no discussion.
22. Status of RevMan 5 and
release plans
Monica had provided a status report on the proposed
release plans for RevMan 5, and the Steering Group had endorsed the proposal to
release RevMan 5 over three module submissions (see item 30.4).
23. 23.1 Quality Advisory Group (
23.2 Updating
Working Group (UWG): Rob’s
report as Convenor of the UWG on the pilot project for updating reviews was
appreciated. He explained that since the UWG was temporary, it was now a
sub-group of the
Action: Rob
24. Statements
from, and farewell to, outgoing Steering Group members
See minutes of first Steering Group meeting, above.
25. Welcome
to Adrian Grant and Joy Oliver
See initial minute at start of second Steering Group meeting, above.
26.
Continuation of La
Biblioteca Cochrane Plus
Xavier
Bonfill, Director of the Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre (IbCC), had requested that
the Steering Group allocate the income produced by La Biblioteca Cochrane Plus
in 2006 and 2007 (30,000 Euros per year) back to the IbCC to support the
continued translation of Cochrane reviews into Spanish. Nick had discussed this
request with Xavier, and had suggested that instead the IbCC could take on a
greater role in translation since they already had the software and the
expertise to do this. He had also had a preliminary discussion with Wiley, who
recognised this as the major area of their initial contract which they had not
yet fulfilled. Nick strongly recommended supporting those who already had
extensive experience in the area of translation. Although the proposal referred
to the royalty revenue accruing to The Cochrane Collaboration from the Spanish
national provision as a result of this translation work, the Steering Group
agreed that funding to entities in specific countries should not be linked to
income earned from those countries, as this would severely restrict the
Collaboration’s ability to assist entities in countries where it was less
well-established. Sally’s suggestion was agreed to, of calling for a much more
detailed budget, budget rationale, timelines and deliverables, with strong
support from the Steering Group. However, she asked that translation into
languages other than Spanish be tendered for, as other areas of the
Collaboration also have experience and expertise in the area of translation.
Janet asked to have input into these discussions on behalf of the Consumer
Network. It was agreed to provide bridging funding for this activity for two
years only, with the above requirements met, and that the broader issue of
translation of Cochrane products should be on the agenda of the Steering Group
meeting in
Action: Nick, Jini
27. Trial
search and translation project for trials in the Chinese language
The
Steering Group had been asked to approve the establishment of a Chinese
language randomised trial database, with English language translation of titles
and abstracts of trials, and to provide funding of 25,000 GBP per year for two
years to support this. There was broad agreement that translation of abstracts
from Chinese was important and would make these trials more available for
inclusion in Cochrane reviews. However, a number of concerns were raised about
the possibility that this project could result in the inclusion in CENTRAL of
some studies which were incorrectly described as trials. The label ‘randomized
trial’ is sometimes inappropriately used in abstracts, so it was suggested that
assessment of each paper by a Chinese speaker with the requisite expertise
might preclude the necessity to translate its abstract. It was suggested that a
brief PICO (Patients, Interventions, Comparisons, Outcomes) analysis of each
trial might be more helpful than a translation, since abstracts often do not
contain this critical information. Either of these options would require work
to be done by scientists rather than translators. Lorne noted that not all
abstracts translated as part of this project would necessarily be used in
Cochrane reviews, and suggested that translating a larger number of abstracts,
as suggested in the proposal, with more detailed assessment at the time a
review was in process, could be a more efficient use of resources. It was
agreed to approve the project in principle, and that Lorne would seek answers
to the various questions that had been raised before a contract for the work
was developed.
Action: Lorne
28. Rationale for
requiring authors to publish their review in The Cochrane Library first
Lorne
explained that this rationale had been generated by the
Action: Jini, Lorne
29. Feedback Management Advisory Group (
Deborah Pentesco-Gilbert (John Wiley & Sons)
attended the meeting for this item. Sherri Sheinfeld Gorin, the Convenor of the
Action: Lisa
30. Information Management
System Group (
30.1 Proposed review of the
30.2 Presentation
of RevMan 5 reviews in The Cochrane
Library: Lorne agreed to raise with the
Action: Lorne, Claire
30.3 Topics
lists for entities other than CRGs: Lorne agreed to raise with the
Action: Lorne, Claire
30.4 Release
of RevMan 5: The Steering Group had agreed (see item 22) that the release
and use of RevMan 5 should be staged over three issues of The Cochrane Library, such that for Issue A, RevMan 5 could be used for submission, for Issue
B it should be used, and for Issue C
it must be used. This process should
be kept under assessment during this period, in case the “must be used” stage had
to be deferred. During the transition, the alternative to submitting reviews
using RevMan 5 would be to continue doing so using RevMan 4. Monica said that
the interface to RevMan 5 could be translated into any language, for
navigational purposes. The Steering Group agreed that this should be a matter for
the IMS Development Team, and should include consultation with people in
non-English language speaking countries, and consideration of any likely impact
on resultant reviews. Sally agreed to work with Monica in consulting the
Action: Monica, Sally
30.5 ‘Parent’
database: The Steering Group agreed to the IMS Development Team creating a
database containing the contents of all published Cochrane protocols and
reviews, using the data contained in Archie. This database should then be made
available on a password-protected website for research and administrative
purposes, to minimise the work of the IMS Development Team in having to respond
to requests for data from it. It was also agreed that approval of requests to
gather and use these data would continue to need the approval of the Steering
Group Executive.
Action: Monica
30.6 ‘Colloquium
Manager’: A temporary sub-group of the Colloquium Policy Advisory Group
(CPAG) had recently taken advice from Dave Booker and colleagues at the German
Cochrane Centre, and as a result this sub-group recommended to the Steering
Group that the ‘Colloquium Manager’ software should be abandoned in favour of
off-the-shelf software for managing future Colloquia. This was approved, and
should be communicated to the Convenors of the CPAG.
Action: Nick
30.7 Timely
decision-making: The
Post hoc note: As Convenor of the
PPG, Lorne later undertook to participate in the regular meetings between the
IMS Development Team and Wiley staff (see also item 30.2).
Action: Lorne
31. Umbrella Reviews
Working Group (URWG)
The URWG was asked to work with Wiley on usability
testing of umbrella reviews. Sally reported that the Handbook Advisory Group (
Action: Lorne, Sally
32. Cochrane Library Users’ Group (
Lorne thanked Emma Irvin, Convenor of the
33. Verbal reports from entity representatives after entity
meetings during the Colloquium:
33.1 Cochrane
Review Group issues:
33.1.1 Review
Group Co-ordinators’ (RGCs’) meeting: Narelle reported RGCs’ concerns about
updating reviews; they were looking forward to seeing new guidelines. She said
that general training for RGCs was not given in a systematic way, so a small
working group of RGCs had been established to develop some induction materials,
possibly leading to the creation of an ‘RGC Procedures’ manual. Concerns had
been expressed about the increased editorial burden on CRGs, especially with
the advent of diagnostic test reviews, umbrella reviews, and Summary of
Findings tables.
33.1.2 Co-ordinating
Editors’ meeting: Peter reported
that this had been very well attended, and that there had been considerable
enthusiasm for moving forward on the issues raised during the mid-year Steering
Group meeting in Khon Kaen in April 2006. Subsequent discussions in
Action: Adrian, Peter
33.1.3 Trials Search Co-ordinators’
(TSCs’) meeting: Dymphna reported the disappointment of some TSCs who felt
that they had not been sufficiently consulted about the recommendations of the
Central Vision Group’s report on CENTRAL, although they did find the
recommendations quite acceptable. Only one TSC was currently included in the
consultation plan, and they felt that this was inadequate. They would like to see
the proposed project manager of the central register undertake a thorough
comparison of reference-based versus study-based registers, and the difference
it would make to the quality of reviews. The TSCs had undertaken to provide
feedback to the CVG by 1 December 2006.
Action: Dymphna
Zbys left the meeting at this point.
33.2 Methods Groups’ meeting: Jon reported that the
Adverse Events Methods Group was about to submit an application for
registration with the Collaboration, having held an exploratory meeting during
the Colloquium. The Statistical Methods Group (SMG) had expressed concerns with
the content and structure of the balance sheets (‘Summary of Findings’ tables)
presented during a plenary session at the Colloquium, and requested that the Steering
Group ensure that they have the approval of the SMG before being implemented.
As it is a core function to hold Methods Group workshops during Colloquia, two
Methods Groups had expressed discontent that their standard training workshop
proposals had been rejected for this Colloquium, which had also prevented
members being able to obtain funding to travel to the conference; this had been
referred to the Colloquium Policy Advisory Group. Jon reported that the Methods
Group Convenors were delighted that the Co-ordinating Editors were focussing on
the quality of reviews, and were keen to contribute to those discussions. Jon
was asked to seek more feedback from Methods Groups about the ‘Summary of
Findings’ tables, and report back to the Steering Group Executive.
Action: Jon
33.3 Fields’/Networks’ meeting: Liz reported on the
positive energy among members of Fields and Networks at this year’s Colloquium.
There had been discussion of renaming some of the Fields, and such requests
would be put to the
33.4 Consumer
Network meeting: Janet reported that the Consumer Network had now been
registered officially with the Collaboration as a Field, and now had the core
functions of Fields. The structure had been consolidated, and the aim was to
work towards ensuring consumer participation in all Cochrane Review Groups.
(See also the discussion of plain language summaries at item 20.3 above.)
33.5.1 Centre Directors’ meeting: Sally reported that
conflict of interest disclosures had been discussed at this meeting. The Centre
Directors had agreed that Centre and Branch Directors should make regular
conflict of interest disclosures in their modules in The Cochrane Library, but that administrative staff need not do so.
The Directors had asked whether the Colloquium sponsorship policy would apply
to regional Cochrane contributors’ meetings as well. Sally was asked to provide
a request to the Executive so that these suggestions could be discussed and
implemented.
Action: Sally
33.5.2 Centre staff meeting:
Joy said a strong need for training of Centre staff in the use of the
Information Management System had been identified at this meeting. Standardisation
of Centre modules had also been identified as a priority: once the pilot project
to standardise Methods Groups’ modules had been completed, the working group
responsible for this (Nancy Owens, assisted by Jini Hetherington, Monica
Kjeldstrøm and Laura Mellor) would be turning their attention to the
standardisation of other non-CRG modules, if the Steering Group approved them
doing so. Diana would put these two issues onto the agenda of the next
Executive teleconference for discussion.
Action: Diana
33.6 Author issues: Narelle suggested that
the Author and the two ‘at large’ CRG representatives on the Steering Group
should be included in all CRG representative discussions in future, and this
was agreed to. Lisa reported that the Centre Directors had provided helpful
feedback about the proposed survey of Cochrane authors, which she would pass on
to Donna.
Action: Lisa
34. Allocation of funds to
specific proposals (see also item 19)
This item was discussed after item 27. Nick had produced for his own purposes a
cash flow forecast modelling the year by year financial implications of approval
of all the requests for funding on this agenda, and this was made available at
the meeting. Jon noted that, although relatively conservative assumptions had
been used, the Collaboration’s bank balance would actually increase in 2006,
and would remain above the Steering Group’s agreed reserve of 200,000 GBP per
year beyond 2010. When publicising the funds approved during this meeting for
various projects, it was agreed to state the particular reasons why each of
them had been approved. It was also agreed that the Steering Group needs to
take a more strategic and less reactive stance in planning the Collaboration’s
expenditure. Lorne pointed out that the majority of funding projected on the
spreadsheet was directed to initiatives with high strategic importance,
including Cochrane prioritisation projects, CENTRAL, the recommendations of the
Steering Group review, and a strategic review of the Collaboration as a whole.
It was reiterated that the criteria for applying to the Cochrane Opportunities
Fund should clearly state that applications need to relate to the goals of the
Strategic Plan (see item 8 above). The Co-Chairs undertook to provide a brief
bulletin to the Steering Group as soon as practical after this meeting, so that
entity representatives could refer to the main decisions that had been taken,
when communicating with their constituents.
Action: Adrian, Lorne
With regard to the request for funds for CENTRAL (item 19), it was reaffirmed
that an interim arrangement had been agreed to at the earlier meeting of the
Steering Group, of appointing an interim liaison person to see through the
implementation of the interim measures, and that the amounts of funding in the
spreadsheet were only estimates. Further Steering Group decisions about funding
for this project would be based on Nick’s paper on the implementation of the
CVG’s recommendations, which would include the role, remit and accountability
of the person charged with taking on the task of formulating a more detailed
plan as to how the Collaboration should move forward on this. Lorne reiterated
that the earlier Steering Group decision had been to authorise a flexible
design for the register that would allow individual CRGs to use it as a purely
reference-based register, a fully study-based register, or a combination of the
two. This design would allow individual CRGs that wished to set up or transfer
to a fully study-based register to do so at their own pace. Dymphna noted that
such a transition would have significant resource implications that should be
addressed as part of the implementation plan for CENTRAL.
Action: Nick
35. Choosing the appropriate
topics for strategic discussion in
It was agreed that the agenda for the strategic
discussion at the next Steering Group meeting in Amsterdam in April 2007 should
include a detailed proposal for an editor-in-chief and an editorial board;
implementation of the recommendations from the Steering Group review (although
this item might be more relevant to the Steering Group and of less interest to
Centre Directors and Co-ordinating Editors); and the Collaboration-wide
strategic review. The Co-Chairs and the CEO would work out a plan for this and
consult with the Steering Group in due course.
Action: Adrian, Lorne, Nick
36. Spreadsheet of Steering
Group members’ outstanding action items
Lorne reminded everyone to let Diana know as soon as they had completed any of
their action items, so that she could update the spreadsheet.
Action: Everyone
37. Any
other business:
37.1 Derivative
products: In response to a question about derivative products, Nick
reminded the Steering Group that members of the Collaboration are required to
give Wiley first refusal for publishing a product derived from Cochrane
reviews. He undertook to ask Deborah PG to provide a definition of a derivative
product and a list of the current derivative products to include in the
Cochrane Manual.
Action: Nick, Jini
37.2 Environmental
sustainability issues: It was agreed that Steering Group meeting agendas
should in future include a standing item on environmental sustainability, and
that decisions made during meetings should be reviewed at each meeting to
ensure that their environmental impact is balanced within the context of the
Collaboration’s Strategic Plan. In his new role as Co-Convenor of the CPAG,
Jordi was asked to encourage the organisers of the São Paulo Colloquium to
consider recycling options, as had been done at this year’s Colloquium. As
Action: Jini, Jordi
37.3 Steering Group meetings: Nick
reported that he would be distributing an online survey to the Steering Group
after the Colloquium, in order to obtain feedback about how its meetings are
conducted, and to improve processes.
Action: Nick
37.4 Amsterdam
mid-year meetings in April 2007: Rob drew attention to the fact that a
flower festival (Keukenhof) is taking place in Amsterdam in April 2007, and
encouraged Steering Group members to book their hotel accommodation as soon as
possible after he had circulated the contact details of suitable hotels near
the location of the Steering Group’s and Centre Directors’ meetings.
Action: Rob
38. Thanks to the Colloquium hosts and others
Lorne expressed thanks to the Dublin Colloquium hosts for
organising such an excellent and enjoyable conference; he would write and thank
Action: Lorne
Godwin
Aja, Consumer Network Representative, Cochrane
Collaboration Steering Group; Member, Publishing Policy Group; Steering
Group representative, Cochrane Library Users' Group; Author, Effective
Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group; Member, Cochrane Consumers and
Communication Review Group; Member, Health Promotion and Public Health Field:
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid consultancies:
any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation? No.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation?
I serve as associate professor, health
promotion and education, at
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts
from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan
with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments
from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Lorne Becker, Incoming Co-Chair, Cochrane Collaboration Steering
Group, Member, Executive Group, and incoming Convenor,
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related organisation?
Yes: Honorarium from Thompson
Micromedex for serving on the editorial board of their DiseaseDex publication.
This relationship ended on 1 July 2006.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts
from a related organisation?
Yes: Small gifts from the Welch
Allyn Corporation and the Dutch Dairy Council.
7. Had an outstanding loan
with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments
from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation
to conduct research?
Yes: In the past five years, I
have received research funding from the National Institutes of Health, World
Health Organization, California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program
(research money derived from
the tax on cigarettes), and Flight Attendants Medical Research Institute, National Science
Foundation.
2. Had paid consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or
kind) for a related organisation?
Yes: I have received consulting
fees from the
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation?
Yes: I have accepted
honoraria from the Association of Medical Writers and Dartmouth University
for talks on reporting of scientific research in the lay press, the World
Health Organization and Pomona University (European Union Center) for talks on
public commentary on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, Kaiser
Permanente for talks on (a) evaluating the quality of research and (b) tobacco
industry manipulation of research, the World Conference on Clinical
Pharmacology and Therapeutics for a talk on managing financial conflicts of
interest in clinical trials, and the Brooklyn Law School for a talk and paper
on systematic reviews.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation? No. Since 1991, I have been a full-time faculty
employee of the
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts
from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan
with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments
from a related organisation?
Yes: I receive about $50 US per year in
royalty fees from the
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Mark Davies, Outgoing
Co-Chair, Cochrane Collaboration
Steering Group, Convenor,
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have
you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation?
Yes: (a) I am a consultant neonatologist: part of my income is
derived from private practice in neonatology; (b) I have acted as a
consultant to BMJ Books reviewing manuscripts and proposals; but no other for-profit
companies; (c) In 2003 I co-edited and published 'Pocket notes on
neonatology' (ISBN 0-9750756-0-8) when the printing costs were partially met by
grants from Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Pty Ltd and Abbott Australasia Pty
Ltd.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation? No.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation? No.
5. Possessed
share-holdings, stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation
(excludes mutual funds or similar arrangements where the individual has no
control over the selection of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal
gifts from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding
loan with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty
payments from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
A. Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned
research, or fellowship from a related organisation to conduct research?
Yes: I received funding from 2001 to
2003 to employ a research fellow from Pfizer Ltd. My salary is part funded
by a
2. Had paid consultancies: any
paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a related organisation?
Yes: I received payment from the BMJ
for reviewing and attending committees since 2000. I was paid consultancy
fees by Pfizer Ltd for statistical advice in 2001 and 2002.
3. Received honoraria: one-time
payments (in cash or kind) from a related organisation?
Yes: I received an honorarium from NICE for lecturing in 2004,
from the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (
4. Served as a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position
of management with a related organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation?
Yes: my unit has received royalty
payments from the BMJ for reprint sales.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Zbigniew Fedorowicz, Representative of members of Cochrane Review
Groups, Cochrane Collaboration Steering Group; Director, Bahrain Branch of the
UK Cochrane Centre; Member,
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation? No.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts
from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan
with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments
from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Donna
Gillies, Author Representative, Cochrane Collaboration
Steering Group; Treasurer; Member, Executive Group; Steering Group
representative, Handbook Advisory Group; Author, Cochrane Acute
Respiratory Infections, Anaesthesia, Heart, Musculoskeletal, Neonatal,
Schizophrenia, and Wounds Review Groups; Peer Reviewer, Cochrane
Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis, and Anaesthesia Review Groups:
A. Financial
interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned
research, or fellowship from a related organisation to conduct research?
Yes: I have received small grants
funding from the Children's Hospital at Westmead.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation?
I have received honoraria as a reviewer
for the Journal of Advanced Nursing.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Adrian Grant, Incoming Co-Chair, Cochrane
Collaboration Steering Group; incoming Convenor, Executive Group, and
Member,
A. Financial
interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned
research, or fellowship from a related organisation to conduct research?
Yes:
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received honoraria: one-time
payments (in cash or kind) from a related organisation?
Yes: a single payment
from Ethicon Endosurgery for attendance
at a meeting to discuss possible research collaboration not pursued.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing interests that could pose a conflict of
interest that would reasonably appear to be related to the primary
interest? No.
Sally
Green, Centre Representative, Cochrane Collaboration
Steering Group; Member, Executive Group; Director, Australasian
Cochrane Centre; Convenor, Quality Advisory Group and Handbook Advisory
Group; Author, Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group:
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research?
All my research is funded
through competitive research grants. I have no commercial research
contracts. My current grants are from The Australian Department of Health and
Ageing, The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, The Australian
Research Council, The Wellcome Trust, ANZ Bank Trustees, Andrology
Australia, and The National Heart Foundation of Australia.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation?
I act as a consultant to the
Australian government.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation? No.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation?
Yes: I am the sole director of a
private physiotherapy practice in
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts
from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan
with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments
from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Dymphna
Hermans, Trials Search Co-ordinator Representative, Cochrane
Collaboration Steering Group; Member,
A. Financial
interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any
grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship from a related
organisation to conduct research: No.
2. Had paid consultancies: any
paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a related organisation? No.
3. Received honoraria: one-time
payments (in cash or kind) from a related organisation? No.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Joy
Oliver, Incoming Centre Representative, Cochrane Collaboration Steering
Group, Member,
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any
grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship from a related
organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid consultancies: any
paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a related organisation? No.
3. Received honoraria: one-time
payments (in cash or kind) from a related organisation? No.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Jordi Pardo Pardo, Outgoing Centre
Staff Representative, Cochrane Collaboration Steering Group, and Member,
A.
Financial interests
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation?
Yes: I am employed full-time by the Fundación de Gestió Sanitària de
l'Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, a not-for-profit charity, and I devote
all my time to the Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre and the Cochrane Lung Cancer
Group. The Centre has received support from several sources, including
pharmaceutical companies, as listed in the Centre's module in The Cochrane
Library and on the Centre's website (www.cochrane.es).
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation?
Yes: I have received a one-off payment from an editorial company for
assessing an evidence-based nursing distance learning training.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation? No.
5. Possessed
share-holdings, stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation
(excludes mutual funds or similar arrangements where the individual has no
control over the selection of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal
gifts from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding
loan with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty
payments from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other
competing interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would
reasonably appear to be related to the primary interest? No.
Rob
Scholten, Centre Representative, Cochrane Collaboration
Steering Group; Co-Convenor,
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received honoraria:
one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related organisation? No.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts
from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan
with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Peter Tugwell, Cochrane Review Group Representative (of
Co-ordinating Editors), Cochrane Collaboration Steering Group; Member,
A. Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned
research, or fellowship from a related organisation to conduct research?
I receive a stipend from the Journal of
Clinical Epidemiology for my editorship of the Journal. I also receive
honoraria from the Canadian Medical Association Journal.
2. Had paid consultancies: any
paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a related organisation?
Yes, from Abbott, Almirall, American
College of Rheumatology, Astra Zeneca, Aventis, Berlex, Biomatrix, Bristol
Myers Squibb, British Medical Journal, Cadeuceus Group, Canadian Coordinating
Office for Health Technology Assessment, Canadian Medical Association Journal,
Eli Lilly, Foundation for Better Health Care, Glaxo-Welcome, Glaxo Smith Kline,
Immunomedics, Innovus, Johnson & Johnson, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,
Lilly Research, Medicine Group, Medicus, Merck, Merck Frosst, Milbank Memorial
Fund, Novartis, Ortho McNeil, Pennside, Roche, Sandoz, Scios, Searle, Wyeth
Ayerst, University of Minnesota, University of British Columbia, University of
Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey, University of Southampton,
UpToDate, VU University Medical Center in Amsterdam.
3. Received honoraria: one-time
payments (in cash or kind) from a related organisation?
See #1 above.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings, stock, stock options, equity with a related
organisation (excludes mutual funds or similar arrangements where the
individual has no control over the selection of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation?
I receive royalties for the
book 'Evidence Based Rheumatology' from BMJ Books (Blackwell
Publishing) as well as royalties from Lippincott Williams & Wilkins for the
textbook 'Clinical Epidemiology'. I also receive editorial royalties
from UpToDate.
B. Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing interests that could pose a conflict of
interest that would reasonably appear to be related to the primary
interest? No.
Janet
Wale, Consumer Network Representative, Cochrane
Collaboration Steering Group; Member, Executive Group; Steering Group
representative, Quality Advisory Group; freelance editor and consumer
representative on Commonwealth of Australia and Western Australian health
committees; consumer for the Cochrane Anaesthesia, Musculoskeletal,
Musculoskeletal Injuries, and Heart Review Groups:
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation? No.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Elizabeth Waters, Field Representative, Cochrane Collaboration
Steering Group; Member,
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any
grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship from a related
organisation to conduct research?
I have received funds from the NHMRC,
Victorian Government Department
of Human Services, the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, and philanthropic
trusts. Colgate
provided toothbrushes free of charge to a randomised controlled trial on which I was CI, and we
distributed these as part of a
multifaceted intervention program.
2. Had paid consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for
a related organisation?
Yes, from the World Health
Organization, the Victorian Cancer Council, and the Australian Research
3. Received honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation?
I received a one-off payment for two
book chapters in 'Evidence-based Paediatrics and Child Health'.
4. Served as a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a
position of management with a related organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts
from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan
with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Narelle
Willis, Cochrane Review Group Representative (of Review
Group Co-ordinators), Cochrane Collaboration Steering Group;
Member, Executive Group; Steering Group representative,
Quality Advisory Group; Review Group Co-ordinator, Cochrane Renal Review
Group; Member, Hepato-Biliary Review Group, External Referee, Hepato-Biliary
Review Group; Member, Screening and Diagnostic Tests Methods Group; Author,
Cochrane Renal Review Group; Member, Working Party for Cochrane Review Groups
Procedures Collection; Member, Abstract Committee for the XIV Colloquium:
A. Financial
interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research?
I am funded by a Department of Health
and Ageing (Australian Government) grant.
2. Had paid consultancies: any
paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a related organisation?
No.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related organisation?
No.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No: I am an employee of The Childrens Hospital at Westmead
and Associated Academic Staff with the
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Hans
van der Wouden, Representative of members of Cochrane Review
Groups, Cochrane Collaboration Steering Group; Steering Group
representative, CENTRAL Vision Group; Member,
A. Financial
interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research?
Yes: as an employee of Erasmus MC -
2. Had paid consultancies: any
paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation?
Yes, as a reviewer of papers for
the BMJ I received several vouchers from the BMJ Publishing Group, and a
fee from The Lancet.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation? No.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation?
Yes, as an employee of Erasmus
MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, I received 1623 euros from the
BMJ Publishing Group for royalty fees for the sale of reprints of a paper we
published in the BMJ.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Declaration of interest of Monica Kjeldstrøm,
Director, Information Management System
In
the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned
research, or fellowship from a related organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid consultancies: any
paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for an organisation? No.
3. Received honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a
related organisation? No.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation?
I am employed by Rigshospitalet,
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)?
I have been given, and continue to hold, shares in a small Danish
biotechnology company. I’m not able to trade in these and do not receive any
income from them. I will not influence the conduct of any review in which this
company might have a financial interest.
6. Received personal gifts from
a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a related organisation? No.
8. Received
royalty payments from a related organisation? No.
Do
you have any other competing interests that could pose a conflict of interest
that would reasonably appear to be related to the primary interest? No.
Declarations
of interest of Secretariat staff
Jini
Hetherington, Administrator and Company Secretary, Cochrane Collaboration
Secretariat:
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research
funding: any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship
from a related organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation? No.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding:
any grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship from a related
organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received honoraria:
one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related organisation? No.
4. Served as a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a
related organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts
from a related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan
with a related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments
from a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
Claire Allen, Deputy Administrator, Cochrane Collaboration
Secretariat; Consumer (commenting on protocols and reviews) with the Cochrane
Ear, Nose & Throat, Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility, Peripheral
Vascular Diseases, Airways, and Acute Respiratory Infections Review Groups;
Member of the Complementary Medicine Field Advisory Board; author in the
Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group; and on the project team
assessing the uptake of the guideline relating to Perioperative Fasting, funded
by the Healthcare Foundation:
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any
grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship from a related
organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid consultancies:
any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation?
Yes: From The Royal
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation? No.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.
A.
Financial interests
In the last five years, have you:
1. Received research funding: any
grant, contract or gift, commissioned research, or fellowship from a related
organisation to conduct research? No.
2. Had paid
consultancies: any paid work, consulting fees (in cash or kind) for a
related organisation? No.
3. Received
honoraria: one-time payments (in cash or kind) from a related
organisation? No.
4. Served as a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee or held a position of management with a related
organisation? No.
5. Possessed share-holdings,
stock, stock options, equity with a related organisation (excludes mutual funds
or similar arrangements where the individual has no control over the selection
of the shares)? No.
6. Received personal gifts from a
related organisation? No.
7. Had an outstanding loan with a
related organisation? No.
8. Received royalty payments from
a related organisation? No.
B.
Non-financial interests
Do you have any other competing
interests that could pose a conflict of interest that would reasonably appear
to be related to the primary interest? No.