We are delighted to announce that Dr Christopher Bunt, MD, FAAFP has been appointed as the inaugural Editor in Chief of Cochrane Clinical Answers (CCAs), reporting to Karla Soares-Weiser, Editor in Chief of Cochrane. Chris has been a practicing Family Medicine physician in the US since 2004 and has recently added Medical Acupuncture to his clinical duties. Chris has also been a Clinician-Educator since 2007, focusing on teaching and designing evidence-based medicine curricula for interprofessional students, residents and faculty colleagues. Chris has worked with the CCA team as an Associate Editor since 2012, writing 56 CCAs. He also has extensive editorial experience as a Contributing Editor for American Family Physician, the largest primary care journal in the US, since 2016.

CCAs form a key strand of Cochrane’s Knowledge Translation strategy, providing concise, evidence-based answers to Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) clinical questions based on Cochrane Reviews. The product was developed in partnership between Cochrane and Wiley and in 2018 became part of the suite of databases available to all Cochrane Library subscribers. The Editor in Chief of CCAs is a new honorary role that has been created to oversee the development and implementation of editorial policies for CCAs, guide editorial strategy decisions and ensure the quality of CCA content.

We are thrilled to welcome Chris to the team; we are convinced that he will be a great asset to Cochrane and will be instrumental in the development and future strategy of CCAs. Karla also welcomes Chris’ appointment: “We are excited to welcome Chris into this new post. We look forward to working with him to further develop CCAs and reach out to clinical communities around the world to promote the use of this important Cochrane resource”. And Chris highlights: “CCAs are the ‘point-of-care home’ for busy clinicians. I am thrilled to continue to work with the CCA team as we further evidence-based medicine practice around the world.”   

Chris is currently the Associate Dean for Student Affairs in the College of Medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, South Carolina. He will be contributing two days a month as Editor in Chief of Cochrane Clinical Answers. He can be reached at cbunt@cochrane.org.

• Read a sample of Cochrane Clinical Answers

The Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group is leading an important piece of methodological research and need your help.

Does it make a difference whether abstracts are screened by one or two people to find relevant studies for a systematic review? How many relevant studies will be missed when abstracts are reviewed by only one person? Can the Cochrane RCT-classifier, a machine-learning tool for classifying RCTs and the Cochrane Crowd, do this accurately? The Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group and the Cochrane Crowd Team have developed a study to try to answer these questions.

The study is made up of three ‘arms’ – three different groups that participants to the study could be assigned to. If you already have experience screening search results for a review, you will be randomly assigned to review a set of 100 abstracts and classify them as "Relevant" or "Not Relevant" to a particular research question from a search for either a pharmacological review or for a public health review. If you have no experience screening for reviews, you will be assigned to the "Crowd" arm where you can screen as many records as you like for the pharmacological review.

More details about the study can be found here.

We are looking for participants:

• with and without experience of screening search results for a review
• willing to spend around 2 to 3 hours screening 100 abstracts over the next three weeks
• over 18 years of age

To join, just follow these 4 steps:

1. If you don't have a Cochrane Crowd account yet, register here first and continue with step 2. If you already have a Cochrane Crowd account, you can go straight to step 2:
2. Click on this link that will launch the brief participant questionnaire
3. Once you have completed the questionnaire, log in to Cochrane Crowd as usual
4. Near the top of your task dashboard you will see the task called Rapid, Rapid, Rapid. This is the task you will have been randomly assigned to. Complete the training and get screening your 100 records!

You don’t have to screen all 100 records in one go. We will keep the study running until Friday 14th June so there should be plenty of time for you to chip away at your 100 records.

If you are able to take part, you will be named on a conference poster about the study at the Cochrane Colloquium, receive a certificate of participation, and enter a prize draw for one of five gift vouchers worth $100.

Happy citation screening!

Bill Silverman Prize

The Bill Silverman Prize is offered annually and explicitly acknowledges Cochrane's value of criticism, with a view to helping to improve its work, and thus achieve its aim of helping people make well-informed decisions about health care by providing the best possible evidence on the effects of healthcare interventions. The Cochrane Steering Group approved the establishment of the Prize in 2007, and it was awarded for the first time in 2008.

Purpose

Please note that this Prize is not for the preparation of a Cochrane Review; rather, it is for a published paper which demonstrates originality and critical thinking, either in evaluating any aspect of the preparation, maintenance or dissemination of Cochrane Reviews or about the work of Cochrane more generally. It should be of high quality, have been accompanied by constructive suggestions on how the relevant aspects of Cochrane’s work could be improved; and have had, or is likely to have, a positive impact on the scientific quality, relevance and use of Cochrane Reviews.

Eligibility

Peer-reviewed papers that fulfil the criteria described above under ‘Purpose’, and were published in the twelve-month period 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019 are eligible for nomination in 2019. 

Nomination process and deadline

The Central Executive Team issues the call for nominations via Cochrane’s mailing lists each year. Nominations can be made by anyone, including the authors of the publication being nominated. Completed nomination forms and a copy of the paper should be sent to Lydia Parsonson at lparsonson@cochrane.org with “Bill Silverman Prize” in the subject heading. The deadline for receipt of nominations is 2 August 2019.

To find out how to apply for the Bill Silverman Prize, visit https://colloquium2019.cochrane.org/bill-silverman-prize

Cochrane Australia Research Fellow and Co-Convenor of the Cochrane Bias Methods Group Matthew Page took out 2018’s Bill Silverman Prize, which recognises and celebrates the role of constructive criticism of Cochrane and its work. Here we catch up with Matthew about who and what inspired him to research and publish his prize-winning paper on common statistical flaws in systematic reviews. (Originally posted on the Cochrane Australia website)

Just under a decade ago, Matthew Page was a newcomer to Cochrane. Attending his first Colloquium in Singapore in 2009, he watched Dr David Moher take out the Bill Silverman Prize and as a result, first discovered methodological research. ‘You could say that was  kind of a lightbulb moment that led to all my future research interests,’ Matthew says. ‘I listened to David at the Colloquium and immediately went home, read his paper and realised there’s a whole community out there, a whole field that’s actually all about trying to improve research. Since then, David has become my mentor/methodological hero and we’ve been working together on all kinds of fascinating areas. So it seems really fitting to receive this award for a paper I worked on with both David and the late Doug Altman – another extremely inspiring and brilliant statistician who’s influenced my thinking about methods and meta-analysis.’ 

‘This particular paper was actually Doug’s brainchild. He - like Bill Silverman himself - often bemoaned the poor quality of published medical research. He strongly believed self-criticism can help drive progress, which is what this award is all about,’ Matthew explains. ‘Following a paper we published on reporting quality of systematic reviews in PLOS Medicine in 2016, Doug guided us to conduct this comprehensive analysis of the misuse of statistics in systematic reviews. We looked at a range of different statistical methods which could be used in systematic reviews and assessed whether they were applied and interpreted correctly in 32 Cochrane and 78 non-Cochrane reviews. Using a 61-item checklist, we discovered that there were common flaws in many Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. Our findings suggest many areas where Cochrane review authors can lift their game.’ 

‘By identifying these flaws, we can gain a much better idea of which statistical methods need checking in submitted Cochrane reviews. We’re hoping to address the issues we identify by developing a checklist that can be used by editors to evaluate the statistics in submitted Cochrane reviews. Once errors are spotted, these can be fed back to the review authors and corrected, which we hope will ultimately lead to higher quality reviews. You could say that these findings probably confirm suspicions that the involvement of statisticians on review teams can really help to address a lot of methodological shortcomings.’

‘So for me personally it was great to be able to identify and address areas for improvement in the future and ultimately receive the honour of this award for doing so,’ Matthew concludes. ‘I think the prize is also further recognition of Doug Altman’s phenomenal contribution to Cochrane and evidence-based medicine. And it also gave us yet another reason to celebrate David Moher, whose work was recognised in a half day symposium at the Colloquium this year. We are both looking forward to doing further work in this area to help authors and editors wrangling with all sorts of methodological questions and approaches.’   

For more on Matthew’s work into systematic review methods, read his interview with Cochrane Senior Editor Toby Lasserson on Assessing the current state of systematic reviews, his Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study in PLOS Medicine or follow him on twitter @mjpages. 

To find out how to apply for the Bill Silverman Prize, visit https://colloquium2019.cochrane.org/bill-silverman-prize

Top Image: Prof David Henry (left), 2017 Prize winner, presents Matthew with 2018's Bill Silverman Prize at the Cochrane Colloquium in Edinburgh

Cochrane Sweden is celebrating their 2nd anniversary. The Centre was established on the 16th May 2017 and is located in the city of Lund. It is affiliated with the Department of Research & Development / Section for HTA Analysis, Skåne University Hospital, in collaboration with the Faculty of Medicine at Lund University and with the Nordic Cochrane Centre in Copenhagen led by Karsten Juhl Jørgensen.

Over the last two years, Cochrane Sweden has been busy promoting-evidence based decision making in healthcare in Sweden. Some accomplishments, so far, have been providing learning tools on how to conduct, edit and read systematic reviews. This has led to Cochrane Interactive Learning being a part of the curriculum at the Medical Faculty at Lund University. The Centre is also actively working with key stakeholders across Sweden to assist in the use of Cochrane reviews in research and practice. Matteo Bruschettini along with his colleague Minna Johansson, and in collaboration with Cochrane Norway and Cochrane Nordic, have been touring the country giving talks at conferences and hosting workshops and seminars about Cochrane.

 More recently, the Director and the Communications Consultant of Cochrane Sweden, Matteo Bruschettini and Dina Muscat Meng, have spearheaded an initiative to support anyone interested in learning about our efforts at Cochrane to have the opportunity to participate in an international exchange programme, which has been named The Cochrane International Mobility Programme. So far, the Centre has already arranged 5 exchange experiences for people interested in learning more about Cochrane evidence at Cochrane Sweden with other centres and groups in Cochrane.

Matteo Bruschettini, Director of Cochrane Sweden, says: "Two years ago, we could not expect such a positive and immediate response to the establishment of a Cochrane Centre in Sweden. Despite a huge delay compared to the other Scandinavian countries and the lack of a national subscription to the Cochrane Library, our workshops and courses have been attended by so many enthusiastic people. Moreover, we’re working at full speed, with junior and senior researchers visiting our Centre and contributing to relevant studies (a few to be published in 2019). We’re very grateful to professor Ingemar Petersson, Head of Research at the University Hospital in Lund, for his wise and generous support. In addition, we aim to further expand the successful and strategic collaboration with the Cochrane Centres in Norway and Denmark and to facilitate the launch of a new Cochrane Field in Sweden."

• Visit the Cochrane Sweden website
• Learn more about the International Mobility Programme
   

Background

The transparent and effective management of conflict of interest is at the heart of Cochrane’s reputation for creating high quality, unbiased health information. Cochrane’s current Commercial sponsorship policy is very strong in comparison to other biomedical  journals. It is consistent with major guidelines bodies, in that it not only requires conflicts of interest to be declared, it also rules that some authors are ineligible from conducting Cochrane Reviews. Nevertheless, all polices, however robust, need to be reviewed and revised periodically. The Commercial sponsorship policy was last updated in May 2014, following a consultation exercise.

Data from cases referred to Cochrane’s Funding Arbiters indicate that some clauses in the current policy are ambiguous or lacking in sufficient detail and are therefore challenging for Cochrane authors and editorial teams to implement. In addition, audits requested by the Cochrane Governing Board Co-Chairs in 2014 and 2017 suggest that adherence to the policy is inconsistent. There has also been discussion within the Cochrane community and elsewhere about the role of non-financial (academic, professional and personal) conflicts of interest, and the need for a policy to address these. In March 2018 the Governing Board approved a proposal to revise the current commercial sponsorship policy and develop a non-financial or academic conflict of interest policy. For more information about the project please see an editorial published in the Cochrane Library in November 2018.

Methods

In October 2018, a project team was assembled to work on the COI policy revision project forward, including David Tovey, Ruth Foxlee, Kirsty Loudon and Graham Smith from the Editorial & Methods Dept and Fergus Macbeth and Angela Webster, Funding Arbiters. Two project boards were convened to provide advice and support to the project team – one focusing on financial conflicts and the other on non-financial conflicts. The project boards have now been merged into a single board which includes representatives from the Governing Board, the Cochrane Council, the Editorial Board, and COI experts both internal and external to Cochrane.

To inform the policy revision the project team has undertaken three separate activities:

1. A literature review to gather ideas and information about COI policies in other organisations globally
2. A survey of the Cochrane user community
3. In-depth interviews with representatives of key Cochrane stakeholder groups and other individuals with COI expertise

Progress to date

The information gathering stage of the literature review has been completed and a report is in the final stages of receiving feedback from the COI Project Board. The report summarises the appropriate sections of COI policies from 33 biomedical journals and organisations and the latest literature on COI.

The community survey closed on the 17th of February with a total of 970 completed entries. The data collected through this survey has been analysed using mixed methods, with both quantitative analysis of the 19 questions and qualitative analysis of the 1,333 free text responses. This included 199 responses to the final question requesting “additional feedback and examples of Conflict of Interest”. A summary report has been drafted and will go to the COI Project Board for comment before the end of May 2019.

Sixteen semi-structured interviews have been conducted with representatives of Cochrane’s various stakeholder groups – funders, guideline developers, consumers, clinicians, science writers and CRG leaders. The information collected from the interviews, including any feedback on Cochrane’s current policy, and any other ideas relating to COI, is currently being analysed and a report prepared. We hope to complete the interview report by the end of May.

Emerging themes and questions

In the work carried out so far, some themes and questions have emerged, which the COI Project Team and Board will consider when recommending possible changes to Cochrane’s policy

• Scope of the policy revision – should the policy cover review production only or encompass COI across other parts of Cochrane (e.g. the Governing Board, Centre & Field staff, CET staff, etc.)?
• Should we set thresholds or “grade” judgements on financial COI?
• Is being a trialist something that is simply declared, or does it prevent authorship? Does it make a difference if the trial is industry funded or publicly funded?
• Should 100% of authors on a Cochrane review be conflict-free? (Current policy states >50%)
• Should Co-ordinating Editors of Cochrane Review Groups be allowed to have any indirect conflicts (e.g. accept consultancy fees or reimbursement for travel from a commercial organisation)? Should this question extend to other editorial base staff?
• What elements of non-financial COI would we want to include in a Cochrane policy – professional, academic, personal, institutional, cultural?
• Is a non-financial conflict something that is simply declared, or does it prevent authorship?
• Should failure to disclose a relevant COI be considered scientific misconduct?
• What is the best approach to monitoring compliance - checking through annual audits or more active, real-time monitoring?

What’s next?

The COI Project Team will draft a recommendations paper and revised policy based on the literature review, the survey results and the interviews with stakeholders. The team is keenly aware that Cochrane’s approach to COI is of interest to many people, both in and outside the organization. Conflict of interest is impossible to avoid and affects everybody – even those who believe themselves to be immune for any type of outside influence. We cannot aim to implement a policy that eliminates COI entirely; nevertheless consumers, clinicians, funders, and policy-makers should be confident that our policy is robust and in-line with industry best practice. In addition to instilling confidence in our users, we must find a way to continue to allow people from diverse academic, clinical, and cultural backgrounds to contribute to the production of Cochrane reviews.

• Review our current Commercial sponsorship policy

A number of stipends and bursaries are available to help consumers and other attendees based in developing countries to attend Cochrane Colloquium Santiago 2019.

Stipends and bursaries represent funding you can apply for if you are eligible that is intended to help cover registration and other expenses associated with attending the 2019 Colloquium.

Cochrane is providing stipends for:
1.    Cochrane Consumers
2.    individuals living in low-lower-middle and upper-middle-income countries (LMIC/UMIC)

The deadline for applying is Monday 10 June 2019 and winners will be notified in July

Find out whether you are eligible and how to apply

To those who are thinking of applying, see below information from some of 2018 Stipend Recipients who attended the Edinburgh Colloquium:

The deadline for applying is Monday 10 June 2019 and winners will be notified in July

Find out whether you are eligible and how to apply

Since 1995, Cochrane’s Consumer Network Executive has provided governance and leadership for the international community of consumers (patients, care-givers, family members and others) who volunteer to help produce and spread Cochrane evidence (1556 and growing, in April 2019). The Executive also represents the consumer voice in other areas of Cochrane, including two members of Cochrane’s Council.

Nominations were invited in early 2019 to fill vacant positions on the Consumer Executive (CE) and applications closed on 29th March 2019. In recognition of the increasing need for representation on Cochrane bodies, and the opportunities ahead for consumer involvement, the decision was taken to increase the size of the CE to six consumer members.

I am delighted to announce that the following new people have been appointed to the Executive for a period of three years:

• Helen Bulbeck
• Rachel Plachcinski
• Maureen Smith

Joy Oliver, who fills a position reserved for someone from a Low- and Middle-Income Country, was re-appointed for a second term of three years.

Continuing members are Sara Yaron and Nancy Fitton. You can read more about the members of the CE here https://consumers.cochrane.org/whos-who.

Anne Lyddiatt, our current CE chair, will this year be ending her distinguished term of service on the Executive.

Key issues ahead for the CE include extending Cochrane’s engagement and involvement around the world; how we better support consumers, especially in peer review; and planning for a post 2020 strategy that embeds consumer involvement in Cochrane.

Meet our new members

Dr Helen Bulbeck

Helen has experienced cancer from a carer’s perspective and also as a cancer patient. She uses the experience of being a patient, relative, member of the public and a carer to support 1000s of patients who have brain cancer. This 360-degree view means that she is well placed to understand the perspectives of patients, caregivers and health care professionals.

Her roles in brainstrust, a national brain cancer charity which she founded, and as a consumer representative with various bodies are as a disseminator of information and the provision of a network and community, so that she can provide advice on achieving effective consumer involvement and creating a voice. Helen’s key drivers are the patients, their carers and healthcare professionals, with whom she interacts daily. Her ethos of 'none of us is as smart as all of us' is a core value for her.

Elemental to Helen’s work is high performance coaching. This sets brainstrust apart. When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves. The coaching relationship enables people to face these challenges, so that they learn how to develop resilience and utilise resources to their full potential.

Helen stays up to date with relevant research, ensuring her reading is not brain centric. The skills she developed whilst studying for her PhD means that she is tenacious in spirit, but with a listening ear.

You can contact Helen at helen@brainstrust.org.uk

Rachel Plachcinski

 
Rachel came to the Cochrane community and the Pregnancy and Childbirth Group via her involvement with NCT, a UK charity supporting parents through pregnancy, birth and early parenthood, which she joined after the birth of her first son. She really appreciated NCT's commitment to information, evidence-based care and peer support, and went on to train as one of their practitioners, delivering antenatal courses for 18 years.

Rachel went to university when her third son started school, completing a BSc in psychology followed by an MSc in Psychological Approaches to Health. She is also a Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) trainer and has run many Journal Club sessions for consumers, using a variety of media. Rachel has represented parents on several major trials in maternity research, and now co-ordinates research collaborations for NCT as well as being joint lead for parent, patient and public involvement at the National Perinatal and Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) at the University of Oxford and a member of the Public Advisory Board for Health Data Research UK. She regularly comments on PCG reviews, is learning how to be a Cochrane author and is working with the PCG team on plans to recruit and support more consumers, especially those from low and middle income countries.

Maureen Smith
 

Maureen Smith, M.Ed. (Psychopédagogie) has a long history of collaboration with the medical community subsequent to a rare disease diagnosis in childhood. She joined the Cochrane Consumer Network in 2015 but her interest in evidence-based medicine dates back to 2000 when she began serving on various Canadian federal and provincial committees as a patient or public member.

Beyond providing peer-review comments for Cochrane Musculoskeletal, Maureen is involved in several Cochrane projects such as Decision coaching for people making health care decisions, two MuSE projects (Barriers and facilitators to multi-stakeholder engagement in guideline development and Impact of multi-stakeholder engagement in guideline development), and Replication of systematic reviews.

Maureen has participated in two Rapid Rec reviews. She is a member of the Ontario Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research Unit’s Patient Partners Working Group, the Institut du Savoir Montfort’s Steering Committee on the collaborative research approach, the Board of Directors of the Canadian Organization for Rare Disorders, and the Patient-Centred Outcomes Research Institute’s (PCORI) Rare Disease Advisory Panel. Maureen has a fervent belief in the importance of evidence-based medicine as she is a patient member on Ontario’s Committee to Evaluate Drugs since 2014 and the Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee since November 2016.

For more information go to https://consumers.cochrane.org/, follow us on Twitter at @cochraneconsumr, and Facebook or email Richard Morley, the Consumer Engagement Officer at rmorley@cochrane.org

Submit your meeting request here (login required)

The purpose of Colloquium meetings is to give sufficient time for the Cochrane community and others to hold business meetings during the Colloquium. Priority will be given to internal Cochrane priority projects, executives and groups. There are several dedicated meeting slots in the programme. These slots are the optimal times for obtaining available meeting rooms:

• Tuesday 22 October, 7.30-8.45am (75min)
• Tuesday 22 October, 1:00-1.45pm (45min)
• Wednesday 23 October, 7.30-8.45am (75min)
• Wednesday 23 October, 1:00-1.45pm (45min)
• Thursday 24 October, 7.30-8.45am (75min)
• Thursday 24 October, 1:00-1.45pm (45min)
• Friday 25 October, 7.30-8.45am (75min)
• Friday 25 October, 1:00-1.45pm (45min)
• Friday 25 October, 1.50-2.50pm (60min)
• Friday 25 October, 2.55-3.55pm (60min)
• Friday 25 October, 4.00-5.00pm (60min)

As meeting requests are submitted and processed, they will be published on the meeting list. When planning your meeting, please refer to the programme overview and the meeting list to avoid conflicts.

The deadline for meeting requests is 6 September 2019.

Colloquium delegates will be able to sign-up for meetings from the 2 October 2019, when the sign-up and schedule launches.

Cochrane is an incredible community of people who all play their part in improving health and healthcare globally. We believe that by putting trusted evidence at the heart of health decisions we can achieve a world of improved health for all. If you share our vision, join our global community today and support Cochrane’s work.

Cochrane’s 13,000 members and over 61,000 supporters come from more than 130 countries, worldwide. Our volunteers and contributors are researchers, health professionals, patients, carers, and people passionate about improving health outcomes for everyone, everywhere.

Becoming a Cochrane member puts you at the heart of our organization. Cochrane membership is an acknowledgement of the contribution made by our global community participating in Cochrane’s work. You cannot pay for Cochrane membership, you earn it through participating in our work – and, it allows you to vote in Cochrane elections and stand for internal governance positions.

If you are already contributing to Cochrane, you can check your membership status here https://join.cochrane.org/your-membership

If you have questions about your status, you can email membership@cochrane.org

Following the news of Karla Soares-Weiser’s appointment as the new Editor in Chief of the Cochrane Library, which was the Governing Board’s principal focus at the Governance Meetings in Krakow earlier this month, the Board is pleased to report on its other main items of business:

1. The Board spent a valuable and important day exploring all of the issues surrounding the future publishing contract for the Cochrane Library
An open tender process will be launched in May inviting potential future publishing partners to bid for the rights to publish the Library beginning January 2021. The Board focused on three main themes linked to this decision: Cochrane’s future financial sustainability; our open access and accessibility ambitions; and our Cochrane Library product & operational strategy. It was agreed what the Governing Board oversight and involvement of the process should be; the organizational aims and objectives of the future publishing arrangements; and the criteria which will be applied in evaluating the competing bids. These strategic discussions gave all Board members an excellent foundation to inform its involvement in the process over the next six months, including final consideration of the special Project Board’s recommendation in September 2019. The Board recognized it is important to keep the Cochrane community well informed on the future publishing contract process throughout this period; and further communications on it will follow.

2. The Board and the Senior Management Team discussed the new format of the Governance Meetings, which were based around extended cross-group strategic sessions made up of the leaders of all Cochrane Group types
All agreed that this new format was a success, with many participants providing feedback that it was far more useful to be able to discuss key issues together as one leadership and management group. The Central Executive Team is currently conducting a survey on the meeting, which you are welcome to complete if you attended, and will use the feedback to inform planning for next year and beyond.

All Cochrane members and supporters are also invited to view a round-up of the meeting activities including videos, pictures, and documents discussed. We are pleased to share with you the opening ceremonies for the Cochrane Governance Meetings 2019. We also have a recording of the Cochrane Review Group Networks Panel. This was an interactive discussion and presentation session on the opportunities and challenges for all Group-types in supporting the continuous improvement of editorial standards for Cochrane Reviews and the development of CRG Networks. Even more videos will be shared in the coming weeks.

3. The contribution of the Cochrane Council at the Governance Meetings was greatly appreciated
It played an important role in securing deeper community involvement and engagement on the strategic priorities discussed during the meetings. It was agreed that, in future, the Board and Council meetings at Governance Meetings and Colloquia should be held on different days, to facilitate interaction between the two and to make it easier for the Senior Management Team to support them during their meetings.

4. The Board commended the success of all Cochrane Groups and the Central Executive Team in delivering on the organization’s strategic priorities in 2018
CEO Mark Wilson and Editor in Chief David Tovey reported to the Board and Cochrane Group leaders at the opening strategic session of the Governance meetings (View Mark's PowerPoint presentation and David's PowerPoint presentation. See the 2018 final report on the delivery of the Strategy to 2020 Targets for 2018 on the Cochrane Community website here). The delays to the delivery of an integrated technology workflow for Cochrane Review production were noted and the Board is confident in the plan in place to complete this project in 2019.

It was also recognized that this year’s plan to run a tender process for a Cochrane Library publisher from 2021 may impact on Central Executive Team’s capacity to support the delivery of some of Cochrane’s organizational 2019 Targets. This situation will be monitored closely to ensure that everyone has the appropriate support.

5. The presentations made by the Senior Editors of the new CRG Networks at the strategic sessions were excellent
You can view recordings of both the presentations and the question and answer period. The Board is particularly excited by the possibility of closer interaction between these Networks and Geographic Groups in developing priorities for review production and training, which were a key theme of the discussions.

Karla Soares-Weiser reported back to the Board on the positive impact the new Support Fellows provided to the Networks through funding from the UK’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The Board recognized that, as expected, the Networks are at different stages of their development, but that each is working hard to deliver their own strategic plan.

6. The Board approved a new way of managing organizational risk for the organization
This new way of managing organizational risk provides clearer ‘ownership’ of different organizational risks, managed by the Senior Management Team who report back to the Board at each of our meetings.

7. A working sub-group of the Board will be established to look into some important issues related to Cochrane Colloquia
There is strong interest in ensuring that Cochrane Groups in Low- and-Middle Income Countries and/or those that might not normally consider hosting a Colloquium, feel able to do so as an important opportunity to build capacity for Cochrane activities all over the world.

8. Several important decisions were also made on Board membership
Catherine Marshall was formally re-appointed as Treasurer following her re-appointment to the Board; Tracey Howe was thanked for her contribution as Treasurer in the interim period. Marguerite Koster reported that she plans to step down from her position as Board Co-Chair at the end of August due to increased commitments at her job with Kaiser Permanente in Southern California. The Board recorded its grateful thanks to her and will run an open appointments process for a new Co-Chair within the next few months.

The Board also decided to re-appoint Martin Burton as Co-Chair for one more year, to September 2020. Martin may only serve one more year – rather than the normal two – as he will reach the six-year limit on Board membership, as specified by Cochrane’s Articles of Association, in 2020. It was agreed that staggering the appointments of Co-Chairs is important for Board stability and continuity of decision-making.

Finally, the Board agreed to invest more resources in recruiting a Board member from a Low-and Middle-Income Country by engaging the support of an external recruitment agency with experience in sourcing Board members for charities. 

In closing the meeting, the Board once again recorded its sincere thanks to outgoing Editor in Chief David Tovey for his outstanding contributions to Cochrane over the past decade.

The full Minutes from the Board’s meeting in Krakow will be available in the coming weeks. In the meantime, you are welcome to read all the open access supporting documents on the Cochrane Community website.

Yours sincerely,

Cochrane Governing Board

Martin Burton (Co-Chair)

Marguerite Koster(Co-Chair)