Eve Tomlinson, NIHR Network Support Fellow for the Cochrane Cancer Network presents the work completed across the cancer network to complete an exercise in stakeholder mapping.

The Cochrane Cancer Network supports the work of six Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs): Breast Cancer, Childhood Cancer, Gynaecological, Neuro-oncology and Orphan Cancers, Haematology, Lung Cancer and Urology. The CRGs in the Cancer Network provide robust evidence required to make important decisions on issues concerning cancer and related topics.

Throughout the review production process, the CRGs in the Cancer Network work with stakeholders such as patients, policy makers, health care professionals, researchers and guideline developers. Stakeholder engagement in systematic reviews helps to ensure that relevant research questions are identified and the outcomes of interest to review end-users are included. Involving end-users from target audiences can also help to improve their acceptance of Cochrane reviews. Their involvement may increase the likelihood of co-production of future reviews and lead to support in the dissemination of review evidence. This all increases the likelihood of Cochrane reviews being used in clinical decision making.

In 2019, the Cancer Network undertook a stakeholder identification project. Stakeholder engagement was highlighted as important in the Cancer Network Strategic Work Plan. In addition, Network members said that they would like to know more about other Cancer Network CRGs’ relationships with stakeholders, and to think about how the Network could improve stakeholder engagement.

The project first involved surveying Cancer CRGs to find out more about their stakeholder (and funder) relationships and to share this information between CRGs. This information was then used as the basis for a mapping project to identify new stakeholders for Cancer CRGs and the Network overall. A visual summary of this project is shown in the infographic and a more detailed account of this project and our experience can be found here, written by Eve Tomlinson, NIHR Network Support Fellow for the Cochrane Cancer Network.

Through this project we identified 180 stakeholders relevant to Cancer CRGs. We plan to use the stakeholder map to inform plans to increase stakeholder partnerships in the Cancer Network. For example, two CRGs have used the stakeholder maps in the planning of a priority setting exercise. Moving forward, the Network plans to work with more CRGs to use the stakeholder maps to facilitate engagement. We will also use the Network stakeholder map and think about how we can develop strategic partnerships with stakeholders at the Network level that are beneficial to multiple CRGs in our Network.

If you are interested in getting involved with Cochrane Cancer as a stakeholder, please email Eve Tomlinson: e.tomlinson@nhs.net

• To learn more about the work of the Cochrane Cancer Review Group Network:
• Cochrane KT learning resources are available
• For more resources on stakeholder mapping and engagement

Anne Littlewood (Cochrane Information Specialists’ Executive), Robin Featherstone (Information Specialist, Cochrane Editorial and Methods Department)

The purpose of the Cochrane Information Specialists’ Executive (CIS Exec) is to provide advice on policy and issues related to the role of the Cochrane Information Specialist. To that end, the CIS Exec recently sent a paper on search peer review to the Network senior editors and their teams with the aim of trying to get a culture of search peer review established within Cochrane. The paper has been a collaborative effort by the Cochrane information specialist community. Although the CIS Exec were responsible for writing it, Cochrane Information Specialists gave their comments and opinions, which were incorporated into the final paper. The work that went into the paper demonstrates how collaboration and Cochrane’s Network structure can be leveraged to promote co-operation and improve the quality of Cochrane reviews.

Why peer review a search strategy?
Two papers have been published, highlighting problems in search strategies for Cochrane reviews. The first was published in 2006 by Sampson et al, the other more recently by Franco et al in 2018. These papers found that a high percentage of Cochrane search strategies had errors, in a high proportion of cases, these were issues that might potentially affect recall.

How can we mitigate these errors? Peer review seems like an obvious place to start. Cochrane protocols and reviews all go out for peer review from clinicians and methodologists. However, it is rare in many Cochrane groups for peer reviewers to comment on the search strategy. This means that in the vast majority of cases, the only person who checks the search strategy and search methods section is the information specialist responsible for writing the strategy in the first place. In the Cochrane groups where there is no information specialist – and there are some – it may be that no-one with search expertise will be checking the search strategy at all. This is where mistakes can happen. A systematic review can stand or fall on the quality of the search, and if the search is not robust and trials are missed, the review will not be robust.

Investigation of the procedures of other evidence producers suggests that peer review of search is undertaken as a routine process and that Cochrane is lagging behind. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (2018) in the UK, the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) (2015) in Germany, the Institute of Medicine (2011), and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) (2014) in the US all require search peer review. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2009) in the UK also recommends peer review.

The importance of search peer review was highlighted with the publication of the new Chapter 4 of the revised Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Lefebvre et al, 2019, section 4.4.8). The Handbook now strongly recommends that search strategies in Cochrane reviews are subject to peer review by a suitably qualified and experienced medical / healthcare librarian or information specialist.

Case example: peer-review reduces screening burden for overly sensitive search

One of the many benefits of search peer review can be saving time for the author teams who are screening the results. In this real-life example from Cochrane’s Editorial and Methods Department, a search was evaluated by a peer reviewer as being too narrow for the topic area (missing a key concept) and searching many more databases that was necessary to meet the MECIR standards. Unfortunately, the search was seen during the peer review stage for the completed manuscript and not at the protocol stage. Over 9000 (!) unique results from the original search had already been screened. In light of the missing concept though, the author team decided to revise their search strategy and repeat their screening. Further, they analysed the performance of the modified and original strategies to capture the included studies already identified.

 
The new search, using feedback from the peer review, retrieved only 2500 unique citations and captured all the included studies identified from the original search. The new search also found one new included study.
 
Revisions to the search were shown to improve the precision of the search and to reduce the screening load significantly for future updates. Sadly, if this search had been reviewed at the protocol stage it would have saved the author team upwards of 65 hours of screening time!

The MOSS search peer review pilot

The information specialists in the MOSS Network decided to run a pilot project to see if they could make search peer review work within their Network. It was informal; the information specialists organised the process via email. The search methods were peer reviewed using the Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Review standards. An existing resource, a structured tool called PRESS, was used as an aid for checking the search strategy.

Information specialists took part on a voluntary basis. Only protocols were included so that any issues with having to revise a search when the review was near to completion were avoided. Feedback was provided informally via email, and protocols went for search peer review at the same time as full peer review, with a two week turnaround so that the editorial process was not held up.

The peer reviewers estimated that the process took approximately 45 minutes to an hour. It was designed to be a “light touch” process; checking that terms used were appropriate and that the Boolean logic was all correct.

The pilot concluded in September 2018, and it was agreed that it was successful by the information specialists involved. Three protocols were reviewed in the pilot phase. Minor typos were corrected, and an error in search syntax was picked up and corrected.

Lessons learned included the value of a standardised checklist (such as the PRESS tool) and the value of a search narrative (or commentary) to go alongside the search strategy, to explain why some of the decisions had been taken around the vocabulary used. The support of the development of a process for peer review of search is included in the MOSS Network’s strategic plan (Cochrane Musculoskeletal, Oral, Sensory and Skin Network, 2018), and information specialists in the MOSS Network have continued to peer review protocols for one another.

Since the pilot, two other networks (Cancer and Circulation and Breathing) have also started to explore peer review of search in their Networks.

Recommendations of the CIS Exec

The CIS Exec recommends that peer review of search strategies in protocols using the PRESS tool should be encouraged within Cochrane review groups and Networks. The information specialists within each Network should organise and support the peer review process as suits their working processes, and decide whether/when it is appropriate to peer review a search. Use of the mailing lists to ask for help with peer review is encouraged if there is no-one available to peer review at Network level.

Training and support will be provided by the Cochrane Information Specialists’ Support Team. The team have already begun to support search peer review with resources available on the Cochrane Information Specialists’ Portal. A training webinar with information specialists from NICE is in the planning stages, with more training planned for later in 2020.

We believe that search peer review has many benefits, including continuing professional development for information specialists, the opportunity to share good practice, and the improvement of the consistency and quality of search strategies in Cochrane reviews.

Resources

• Information Specialists Executive 2019 White Paper on incorporating peer review of search methods and strategies.
• Search methods and strategy peer review assessment form for Cochrane intervention protocols - Tool integrating MECIR standards for reporting a protocol and PRESS elements to assess the main database search strategy
• Peer review of search strategies webinar recording – recording of a training webinar for Cochrane Information Specialists, held in 2019.

References

• Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. 2014 AHRQ Publication No. 10(14)-EHC063-EF. Rockville, MD: Available at: www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov, accessed 18 April 2019
• Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare, 2009. Available at: https://www.york.ac.uk/media/crd/Systematic_Reviews.pdf, accessed 18 April 2019
• Cochrane Musculoskeletal, Oral, Skin and Sensory Network. Strategic Workplan 2018-2020. 2018. Available at: https://moss.cochrane.org/about-us/network-strategic-plan, accessed 18 April 2019
• Franco JV, Garrote VL, Liquitay CM, Vietto V. Identification of problems in search strategies in Cochrane Reviews. Research Synthesis Methods. 2018 May 15, 9(3): 408-416.
• Institute for Medicine. Standards for finding and assessing individual studies. In Finding what works in healthcare, 2011. Available at: https://www.nap.edu/read/13059/chapter/1#ii , accessed 18 April 2019
• Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care. General methods. 2015. Available at: https://www.iqwig.de/download/IQWiG_General_Methods_Version_%204-2.pdf, accessed 18 April 2019
• Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, Marshall  C,  Metzendorf  M-I,  Noel-Storr  A,  Rader  T,  Shokraneh  F,  Thomas  J,  Wieland  LS.  Technical  Supplement  to  Chapter  4:  Searching  for  and  selecting  studies.  In:  Higgins  JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston MS, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (eds). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic    Reviews    of    InterventionsVersion    6.    Cochrane,    2019.    Available    from:    www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.

Sampson M, McGowan J. Errors in search strategies were identified by type and frequency. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2006 Oct 1;59(10):1057-e1.

"This award means so much to me. I never had the pleasure of meeting Chris Silagy but over the years have heard just how insightful, creative and above all collaborative he was. I have been so fortunate to work with many inspiring and dedicated colleagues, not least my wonderful nominators whom I thank so much for this, as well as the Cochrane Dementia Group (past and present members), the Cochrane Information Specialist community and of course the Cochrane Crowd team.

I think I have the best job in Cochrane because not only am I able to work with so many brilliant people, I also get to work with the Cochrane Crowd community, without whom I would not be getting this award. This community has amazed me from day one. It has proved to me time and again that working together towards common goals can produce amazing results. We live in unsettling times, yet this community shows me on a daily basis some of the best of what we humans have to offer: intellectual curiosity and integrity, generosity, incredible attention to detail and a shared commitment to help turn information into knowledge and wisdom. Thank you Cochrane Crowd."

Anna Noel-Storr, 2019 Chris Silagy Prize winner

Anna works within Cochrane as the Information Specialist for the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), a Member of the Cochrane Information Specialist Support Team, and Manager of Cochrane Crowd; all of which are roles she performs with exceptional skill and commitment. Anna was awarded the Chris Silagy Prize for her work in establishing, developing, leading and being the heart and soul of Cochrane Crowd. Cochrane Crowd is Cochrane’s citizen science platform, a global community of volunteers who contribute to classifying the research needed to produce Cochrane Reviews and support informed decision-making about health care. Congratulations Anna, and thank you.

Sally Green, Co-Director of Cochrane Australia, and Philippa Middleton, researcher, are both on the Cochrane prize governing committee.  Here they answer some questions about the Chris Silagy Prize, which is awarded to an individual who has made an "extraordinary" contribution to the work of Cochrane which would not be recognized outside the scope of this prize. The Chis Silagy Prize is one of several prizes awarded annually at the colloquium.

Can you talk about your relationship with Chris Silagy? In your view, what impact did he have on Cochrane?

Chris was the foundation Director of the (then) Australasian Cochrane Centre. While Chris was on Fellowship in Oxford, Iain Chalmers recognized his potential to lead Cochrane in Australia on his return home, and together they helped to establish the Cochrane Australia in 1994. At this time it was based in Adelaide, with Philippa as Assistant Director. When the Centre moved to Melbourne, Chris recruited Sally and Steve McDonald to help build the presence at Monash. Sally had met Philippa and Chris as the first Australian Cochrane Fellow during a blistering 40-degree week in Adelaide in 1999.

Chris had an enormous and positive impact on the Cochrane Collaboration. He was Chair of the Steering Group from 1996 to 1998, and put together Cochrane’s first strategic plan. He had immeasurable energy (we used to call him the tornado) and a talent for fostering success in others.

Why did Chris feel it was important for this fund to be set up?

Chris had long advocated that Cochrane’s success was due largely to the efforts, altruism and collaborative outlook of many people, often working in under-recognized roles. When he died of lymphoma in 2001, aged 41, Chris requested a fund be established to recognize and reward these individuals, and so the Chris Silagy Prize was established.

Why is this Prize so important to the work of Cochrane?

The inaugural Prize, awarded in Stavanger in 2002, exemplified Chris’s intentions when Jini Hetherington became the first recipient of the Chris Silagy Prize. There wasn’t a dry eye in the house. We love the Chris Silagy Prize not only as it remembers our friend Chris, but because it also provides a way of celebrating the special characteristics of the people who have been recipients. There is nothing else like it.

We believe Chris would have been absolutely delighted to see the way Cochrane has developed and grown, and would have joined us in celebrating all of the individuals who have been awarded the Prize over the past 14 years (see here for list).

Even if you didn’t know Chris Silagy, we are sure all would agree that it remains important to celebrate the attributes and efforts of those who contribute to Cochrane in these special ways.

What were the judges looking for?

The selection panel is made up of Prize recipients. The criteria against which nominees are scored are:

• making an extraordinary contribution to Cochrane;
• making a contribution that exceeds the expectations of their employment;
• making a contribution to Cochrane that would not be recognised outside the scope of this Prize;
• identified by their peers as consistently contributing to a spirit of collaboration.

What are prize recipients awarded?

Chris Silagy Prize recipients are awarded $AUD 1000 from a memorial fund held by Monash University. In addition, they receive a certificate, and Cochrane meets expenses associated with them attending the next Colloquium. The Prize is awarded at the Colloquium each year. 

For more information on The Chris Silagy Prize see here.

Muriah Umoquit is Communications and Analytics Officer with Cochrane’s Knowledge Translations team. She has attended and presented at many academic conferences before, with Vienna 2015 being her first Colloquium.

Is the Cochrane Colloquium your first big conference? Perhaps you’re excited and a bit nervous, maybe not sure exactly what to expect? Fear not! We’ve put together a list of tips and ideas to help you navigate multiple days of intensive interaction with your health, sanity, and collaborative enthusiasm intact!

Taking the plunge – sessions and colleagues

1. Stick with a session - rather than try and get to every session you really want to, try sitting through all the talks in one session that ties in with a general interest you have. You won’t lose time rushing between rooms and you’ll learn things you wouldn’t otherwise have thought you wanted to know more about.
    
2. Introduce yourself and connect – this conference is a great chance to meet people you’ve read about, or who might be doing something interesting in your field. And they want to meet you too! Don’t be shy about introducing yourself and asking questions when you sit next to people in oral sessions, workshops, and breaks. A great event to attend to make the most of the networking opportunities is the 'Meet Cochrane’s CEO, Editor-in-Chief, Governing Board co-chairs and Council' event on Thursday. The  'Pac-Man Rule' is also a nice idea to  keep in mind for including people in conversations at conference.
    
3. Newcommers are welcome - not only are first-timer Colloquium attendees welcome, they are celebrated! Stop by the Cochrane Community Booth to pick up up a 'first time attendee' ribbon to add to your name tag. And make sure you add the 'Student, Newcomer, and Early Career Professional Session' to you calendar on the Tuesday - it's a great way to kick-start the Colloquium by making new contacts and getting tips.
    
4. Visit the Cochrane Community Exhibition Stand - During all breaks and at lunch we will have helpful Cochrane veterans ready to offer support and give advice and information to those who need it. Stop by the Cochrane Community Exhibition stand and look for someone wearing the lovely purple Cochrane sashes. You can view profiles of some of the people at the booth in advance.
    

Logistics – navigating the day

1. Orient yourself - make sure you have your timetable and map (either electronic or on paper) on hand – otherwise it’s always a last-minute stress figuring out where and when you’re supposed to be places!
    
2. Pack snacks – the meetings start early, your hotel breakfast doesn’t open until 8am, and there’s no shop in sight. Or maybe you’re too busy talking and forget to eat during the breaks. Make sure you have some emergency snacks packed in your bag to keep you going through the day.
    
3. Make the most of breaks - they are when you are most likely to see old friends and make new ones. Lack of formality helps to break down some of the barriers and ease conversation. It’s a perfect opportunity to talk to people you recognize as email addresses.

Personal well-being – maintaining your perspective

1. Schedule down time - plan your social diary to keep some time back for yourself. It’s tempting to use the evenings to see who’s in the bar, but you can avoid fatigue by going for a run/swim, or just going to bed early and reading. Check out the recommended tours and plan some time to see beautiful Chile.
    
2. Buddy up – it can get lonely if you’re always rushing from one thing to the next, alone. Finding a ‘conference buddy’ and keeping tabs on each other helps.
    
3. Check back with your base – after a few 14-hour days it can start to feel as though you’re in a different and very intense world! It can help to schedule time for a Skype call with a friend, family member, or workmate who’s not at the conference and re-connect with your daily life. Fitting in some down-time just by yourself can be great too!

Have you got Colloquium tips of your own to share? Send an email or a tweet so that we can share!

Muriah Umoquit
#CochraneSantiago
@cochranecollab

Welcome to the next instalment of TaskExchange Champs, where we showcase the great people using TaskExchange and how they’re making the most of the platform.

This month our TaskExchange Community Engagement and Partnerships Manager Emily chatted to Cathryn Broderick from Cochrane Vascular about finding consumers and translators on TaskExchange.

Name: Cathryn Broderick
Occupation: Assistant Managing Editor, Cochrane Vascular

Hi Cathryn! Some TaskExchange members don’t work for Cochrane. For their benefit, could you tell us about your role as Assistant Managing Editor?

Sure. I support the Managing Editor in publishing systematic reviews – in Cochrane Vascular these deal with all aspects of peripheral vascular disease. I communicate with author teams so protocols/reviews are submitted on time and to make sure their content is correct and complete; check that conclusions match the evidence presented; and identify and invite peer and consumer referees.  I also help disseminate the systematic reviews once published to maximise their usefulness and impact.

And how do you use TaskExchange?

Primarily, I use TE to ask people with personal/carer knowledge of specific conditions – such as deep vein thrombosis or varicose veins – to act as consumer reviewers on our protocols/reviews.  Consumer reviewers are crucial in ensuring that our reviews both answer the questions relevant to the people needing the treatments (interventions) we are reporting on, and that these questions are answered in a clear way.  I also make requests for people to help translate primary studies to help author teams.  

Has TaskExchange been successful for you?

Task Exchange offers the perfect forum to bring people with a common belief in access to best evidence together.  Translations wise, I have been very successful – thank you!  I have also ‘met’ many helpful people who have acted as consumer referees, though because some of our reviews deal with very specialist topics (comparing intricate surgical techniques) it can sometimes be tricky to find consumers.  As Task Exchange has evolved, I am seeing an increase in the number of people responding – which is just great!

How, if at all, has TaskExchange impacted your group’s systematic reviews? Process and/ or findings?

The value of consumer comments on our reviews (and earlier at protocol stage) has a hugely important and positive impact on our group.  We are extremely grateful to all the people who give up their free time to wade through the details and are constantly reminded of why it is so important to get the evidence out there accurately.

That’s great to hear! How long has it taken to find helpers on TaskExchange?

There is no one answer to that.  It’s all in the timing.  I have had responses (and completed tasks) within 24 hours!  Sometimes a few weeks are needed for the right person to click that button.

Have you been able to find appropriate helpers on TaskExchange?

As above, this can be task specific.  It’s a big yes for translations.  Responses from consumers can be more sporadic and are definitely topic dependent - which is totally understandable.  I am very optimistic with more consumers becoming aware of and using TE, this will increase.

Do you post on TaskExchange every time you look for a consumer reviewer/other..?

Yes – from the end of 2018, every time a protocol/review needs a consumer reviewer I have posted on TE.

Once you’ve posted on TaskExchange, do you disseminate the task post at all?

Thanks to the twitter icon in TE it is very easy to tweet once I have posted a task.  All I need to remember to do is add handles and hashtags – I usually remember by the second tweet…...

How do you use the TaskExchange rewards system?

To thank our consumer reviewers we send them a PDF copy of the published protocol or review; and include their name both within the protocol/review and our web pages.

Do you have any final words for MEs or others considering TaskExchange to find helpers?

There’s a lot of keen and enthusiastic people in TE! Make yourself a template to remind yourself what info you need – this makes it much quicker to create a task and send it out there.

And because we’re not ALL about work… what is something fun that you’re doing out of work?

Just to try something different I recently started some evening classes to learn to play the violin.  I’m not giving up my day job just yet! I also enjoy cycling every now and then, and dragging my two teenage kids out into the fresh air!  They didn’t want to be in the photo so it’s just me and the view.

 
That looks beautiful Cathryn! Ah to be beside the seaside…. Thanks very much for taking the time to chat today.

My pleasure, Emily!

To find consumers and translators on TaskExchange, sign up here. And remember, you don’t have to be working for Cochrane to use TaskExchange! You might also like to read six tips on finding helpers on TaskExchange and as always, feel free to email us with any queries or feedback on taskexchange@cochrane.org

Related articles

• TaskExchange Champ: Aidan gains authorship through translating on TaskExchange<
• TaskExchange champ: Stephana gains skills and finds collaborators
• TaskExchange Champs: Sheila accesses 450 translators in seconds

Muriah Umoquit, Communications and Analytics Officer in the Cochrane Knowledge Translation department spoke with Mike Morrison, a Ph.D. candidate in organizational psychology at Michigan State University. Mike has worked with Cochrane to create conference poster templates that Cochrane members can use at the upcoming Cochrane Santiago colloquium and at other conferences they attend.

Hi, Mike. Can you tell us a bit about yourself so we have an understanding of how you are approaching academic posters?
I’m a PhD candidate in organizational psychology at Michigan State University. I come from a design background with expertise in industrial-organizational psychology.

What do you see as the purpose of academic posters?
Well ideally posters at conferences should serve as a jumping-off points for scientists to discuss their work. In an ideal word, you should be able to navigate the poster hall, find the posters that are most relevant to you, get new information from them, and then discuss further with the maker of the poster. Unfortunately the format of most academic posters prevents this from happening many times – which is frustrating for both the attendee and for the person presenting the poster.

I think any conference attendee can relate to this. Most academic posters follow the same format – the majority of the ones that I see look like the ones I made from 10 years ago. What’s wrong with them?

Academic posters really haven’t changed for many, many decades. I think the main issue with these posters are that they assume people are going to stand there and read our posters in silence for 10 straight minutes, following the order of the sections we've laid out. But with a rows and rows of posters, poster presenters asking if you have questions, and the buzz of poster sessions - that generally doesn’t happen. Most of the time you are just overloaded with a wall of text and chances are that you are missing out on information that could be important to your work.

Why are you so passionate about making conference posters better?
I see this as low laying fruit; this one aspect of scientific learning that can be changed dramatically with better design. I see it as a bottleneck to learning. If we can improve the learning efficiency with a better academic poster design, even by a tiny bit, we can help to uncork the bottleneck and create massive ripple effects across science. That’s exciting!

So what would make these posters better?
One that you pick out the important information as you walk by it in the poster hall but then also has the information you need if you want to stop and learn more. So a ‘better’ poster is one that puts the main finding in plain language as the main feature and overall has less text, less clutter, and is more user-friendly.

Tell us more about the design you came up with?
The template boils down the conference poster to just the essentials: a main finding, in big type and plain language; an "ammo bar" of data for presenters to use while they're talking to conference attendees; and a "silent presenter" bar with bullet points introducing the study, its methods and results.

It sounds great but is there evidence that this design works?
The #betterposer design has been well received by both those presenting and those viewing it. The response to poster design has been overwhelmingly positive, with some ‘top poster’ awards even given to these posters at conferences.  An exit survey of attendees at a recent conference of all #betterposters found that 68 percent of attendees preferred even a plain #betterposter layout to the traditional poster design.

And those that don’t like it, what’s been the criticism of these templates?
Some feel that the approach is too extreme, say there is a lot of ‘wasted space’, or are worried that it still hasn’t been rigorously tested.

It a different approach to conference posters, so I understand that not everyone will ‘buy’ into it. But I encourage people to try it out for themselves next time they do a poster. Don’t start with everything and boil it down. Instead, use the #betterposter template to start with the essentials, and add in extra items only if really needed. I can guarantee that you'll learn something about what works and doesn't from trying the #betterposter layout, whether you decide to use it as your final poster or not - you can still use the traditional academic poster template that Cochrane has designed.

And you have adapted these #BetterPoster templates for Cochrane?
Cochrane has its main colours but all the Centres, Field, Review and Methods Groups all have ‘community’ colours in them. We have adapted the template so that each group can download the template colour they need to use and start adding in their data and Cochrane group logo.

The templates are even adjusted to the specific size requirements for Santiago Colloquium!

If Cochrane members would like to use these new templates, how can they?
You can download the poster template in your specific Community colours here:

• Cyan #betterposter template
• Green #betterposter template
• Magenta #betterposter template
• Orange #betterposter template
• Red #betterposter template
• Teal #betterposter template

Then just add your logo and data and you are set for the Colloquium or any other conferences that you presenting at.

How can Cochrane users help to determine if #betterposter templates are better than the traditional conference poster layout?
We are working on a larger evaluation of the design with both those who have used to the templates to create a poster and those who have viewed the design as a conference attendee. We will be inviting Cochrane members to participate in this after the Colloquium.

We are working on a larger evaluation of the design with both those who have used to the templates to create a poster and those who have viewed the design as a conference attendee. We will be inviting Cochrane members to participate in this after the Colloquium.

In the meantime, share your feedback and pictures of poster on social media with the hashtag #betterposter

'Cochrane at the WHO' is a blog series that highlights the partnership between Cochrane and the World Health Organization. If you would like to share a story about how your Cochrane Group is working with WHO, please contact Emma Thompson, Advocacy and Partnership Officer.

Here, Joerg Meerpohl, Director of Cochrane Germany and member of the Cochrane-WHO Working Group, talks about his work with WHO and why he enjoys it.

Could you give a quick introduction to yourself and your work within Cochrane?
I am the Director of Cochrane Germany. I first got involved with Cochrane Germany as a researcher in 2007, became Deputy Director in 2011 and moved into the Co-Director role with Gerd Antes in 2015, until he retired in 2018.

Alongside this, I am a member of the Cochrane-WHO Working Group, which meets three or four times a year to discuss and advise on the partnership between Cochrane and WHO. There are connections between Cochrane and WHO at many levels, with a huge amount of work being done. Use of Cochrane evidence is very important to WHO in the development of their guidance.

Can you tell us about your own activities with WHO?    
Since 2011, I have been involved with several WHO groups, mostly through my expertise in guideline development and GRADE methodology. For example, I have contributed to guidelines on HIV, nutrition and vaccine hesitancy.

Through this work, Susan Norris from WHO asked me to provide some training on GRADE methodology to WHO technical staff. Gerald Gartlehner from Cochrane Austria and I then developed a two-day training course, which we have now delivered four or five times. The courses have been well-attended, with 30-35 participants each time and we have had very positive feedback.

For the last few years, Cochrane Switzerland and the University of Lausanne have been leading a 2-week training course on systematic reviews and evidence synthesis for the Human Reproduction Program, the UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special programme of research, development and research training in human reproduction. I have supported this by covering the GRADE/guideline side of things.

Does Cochrane evidence impact on WHO’s work?
Yes, absolutely. As an example, I have been involved with the WHO Nutrition Guidance Expert Advisory Group (NUGAG) for about five years – initially providing external methodological support and, in the last few years, as a formal member. NUGAG focuses on guidance for nutrition and dietary goals, and Cochrane Systematic Reviews have been considered and informed recommendations. This includes several reviews on fat by Lee Hooper from Cochrane Heart, another member of NUGAG.

What advice would you give to members of the Cochrane community interested in getting involved in WHO work?
There are many ways to engage with WHO. Cochrane and WHO are in contact about WHO’s upcoming guidelines and where there is a need for more systematic reviews – so one route is to get involved in producing these reviews.

WHO’s technical staff often need GRADE and guideline methodology support, so if you have this kind of experience, you can ask to be added to their database.

Working with WHO is great fun. It is, of course, demanding, working with short timelines, and in an international context with a variety of interests. Navigating one’s way through meetings can be challenging. I try to always work with at least one WHO group at any time. Of course, I have the advantage of being quite close to Geneva, so it isn’t too difficult for me to be active.

I have learned a lot while working with WHO; it has enhanced my personal skills and my ability to interact with a diverse range of people with different backgrounds and skillsets. I also get to work with lots of smart people, who are experts on a variety of topics, which I really enjoy.

TaskExchange Champ: Aidan gains authorship through translating on TaskExchange: Aidan gains authorship through translating on TaskExchange

Welcome to the next instalment of the TaskExchange Champs series, where we showcase the great people using TaskExchange and how they’re making the most of the platform.

This month our TaskExchange Community Engagement and Partnerships Manager Emily chatted to senior resident in Preventive Medicine (Public Health), translator and sweet dessert connoisseur Aidan Tan.

Name: Aidan Tan
Age: 31
Occupation: Doctor
Program: Preventive Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore
Health Services & Outcomes Research, National Healthcare Group, Singapore

What is your current main job/role? Can you tell me a little about that?

I’m a senior resident in Preventive Medicine (public health), with a focus on health services research. My job is quite diverse outside of primary care and preventive medicine clinical work. It covers multiple domains: epidemiology, biostatistics, programme evaluation, infection control and even health protection/promotion. For example, two of my research recent projects are: designing of a comparative clinical study for MRSA (Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus) infection control, and a retrospective cohort study describing the prevalence and incidence of atrial fibrillation (a cardiac condition that can lead to stroke) among those with metabolic syndrome.

How do you use TaskExchange?

I admit, I am quite technologically challenged, so I don’t utilise IT to the fullest! I visit TaskExchange mostly to find any translation tasks that I can help on.

What sort of tasks do you apply for?

Unfortunately, I don’t have the time to help intensively on many of the tasks! Translation, screening and data abstraction is what I apply for, mainly due to the flexibility in timing.

What motivates you to get involved on TaskExchange?

I started in 2016, when I had a stint with Cochrane France. One of the researchers there requested for my help in screening Chinese articles and to abstract the required data. From there, it was only a matter of time before I found TaskExchange and offered my help to the other groups!

 Aidan, second from left, enjoying the Seine with colleagues from Columbia University. This was in 2016 during his time with Cochrane France.

There are many Chinese trials and studies out there! However, due to the language barrier and differences in technical/medical terminology, these studies are often passed over. There is a wealth of knowledge in these studies, and it is a waste for them to be published but not utilised! I imagine this is the same for other language studies (Spanish, Dutch, French…).

Aside from my personal agenda, TaskExchange has been a great way to get involved in evidence generation for future users and clinicians worldwide! Cochrane reviews have been, and still are, one of the major sources of information that guide health-related policy and clinical practice. TaskExchange is an easy and convenient way to contribute to this!

Has TaskExchange been successful for you? I hear that you were invited to be an author on one of the tasks you worked on. How did that happen?

TaskExchange is a great platform! As someone who has issues with Microsoft Office, I can safely say that it is quite easy to navigate (and I like that the buttons are big too). It is easy to find tasks, and the ‘appropriateness level’ is a nice touch!

It was actually that which led me to becoming one of the authors! I had helped the Cochrane Incontinence group previously on translating/screening and extracting data for some papers. Some time after, Sheila contacted me to ask if I could help with a couple more.  It was to my surprise after it was done, the team wanted to ‘meet’ me and offered authorship! It was entirely unexpected, and it really helps that to see that even the small tasks are appreciated and can reap unexpected returns!

How do you keep on top of the tasks being offered?

It is a bit of a relaxation thing for me, funnily enough! The papers I translate are often in areas I don’t actively work in, so it helps me to disengage from my usual work mentally, and that is a refreshing feeling.

I do try to pace myself though – and that is the wonderful thing about TaskExchange. You have the option to take on as much as you feel you can handle. And you may find that it is less time-consuming than expected!

What happens once you apply for a task and are chosen? E.g., how do you communicate with the task poster and make sure you get the job done well?

When I apply for a task, there is an option to leave a message about how I can help. In that box, I leave my contact details (email), for the poster to get back to me at their own time. I try to be clear on what I can or cannot do, and that helps to set expectations. For instance, if the request is for translation of a full article, I may apply for the task but lay out that translations can take a while – with timeframe of weeks rather than days. However, I do also offer what alternatives can be done – such as a quick screening to see if it fits (and thereby bypassing the need to translate the whole article), or just the pertinent sections.

It helps to know what the task really entails! A full translation request may just be a request to screen the abstract. The translation being a means to that end. Have experience in screening, risk of bias assessment and data abstraction, I can help to do the entire process without having to do the tedious thing of translating the whole article!

I guess it really boils down to having open communication channels and being clear on what is really being requested. Oh, and having good follow-up in case anything’s unclear or needs to be clarified!

What benefits are there, to getting involved with TaskExchange as a helper?

I find it relaxing, but that is probably my weird quirk. Being a helper or volunteer on TaskExchange can be mentally stimulating (or challenging) for translations, because you never quite know what posters can ask for! It can deepen your knowledge of the language, especially when it comes to technical terminology, or even how certain situations or environments are described!

It also helps you think critically – risk of bias assessments really forces you to consider the weaknesses or strengths of a study! It makes you question even daily news or radio casts about ‘the latest study on coffee/chocolate”. Plus, it makes you sound intelligent over the dinner table when family and friends bring up that controversial coffee/chocolate study and you get to throw in big words like ‘randomisation’ or ‘blinding’.

And finally, there’s the glow of helping someone. That’s what volunteering and helping is for, isn’t it?

Do you have any tips for other people on how to get chosen for a task!?

It’s really a matter of being persistent and being explicit on how you can help! TaskExchange does all the work of putting the requester and the helper together on the same platform. From there, it’s a simple process of saying “hey, I want to help, and this is what I can do! I’ve done it before, see Exhibit A!” or “I want to help, it’s my first time, but I can do this because I’ve got background in the area!”

There are tasks that I don’t get a response from, and that’s okay. It just means that they’ve either found a solution on their own, or someone else has done it. Just go on and apply for the next one!

Also, the Cochrane Collaboration is a wide global network. There may be local groups near you! There are seminars and training courses that they run sometimes, and those really help open your eyes to what really goes on in a review (and helps you find out which bits you really want to do!)

Any final words to people thinking about helping out on TaskExchange?

Volunteering and helping out on TaskExchange is for everyone and anyone! You don’t need a PhD or a clinical doctorate. The tasks are a great way to get involved at your own time and own pace! Tiny things or small tasks may seem inconsequential at first, but they do add up on a grand scale.  Plus, it looks good on your CV to show that you’re interested and willing to help!

And because we’re not ALL about work… what is something fun that you’re doing out of work?

Wait, TaskExchange is not considered fun?

I spend my downtime picking up and putting down heavy things repeatedly!  I’ve been doing it for a couple of years now, and it’s a habit. A good habit (and necessary evil), really, since I eat like a hobbit and have the willpower of a limp noodle when it comes to dessert!

Haha! Tell me a bit about these desserts……?

Here is an unusual one; a molten lava cake on a thin biscuit, served on a bowl of choco pebbles and ice cream, absolutely a delight before eating! Poke it and let the lava flow down onto the ice cream for a visual treat too!

Aidan, this is wonderful! I am a little lost for words, that dessert is incredible! Thank you so much for chatting to me, it has been an absolute delight.

Thank you, Emily.

Do you have translation skills? Are you interested in helping out on TaskExchange? Sign up here. You might like to also read Six tips for helping out on TaskExchange.

Related Resources

• TaskExchange champ: Stephana gains skills and finds collaborators
• TaskExchange Champs: Sheila accesses 450 translators in seconds

This summer Cochrane Croatia took part in the Cochrane International Mobility (CIM) Programme and hosted a brilliant, smart and hardworking young colleague, Sarah Tanveer, one of the Cochrane’s 30 under 30.

This was an encouraging experience for us all, and spending time with Sarah, exchanging experiences, teaching and working with her was a true refreshment to our Centre.

What comes to my mind when I look back at this worthy initiative and our experience is this sentence that Miranda Cumpston once wrote…

“Being part of The Cochrane Collaboration is more than a publication or a job. It's a network of colleagues, advisors and friends that spans the globe ‐ an incomparable opportunity to learn, collaborate and share with some amazing people”.

We are thankful to Cochrane Sweden for initiating this programme and we look forward to watching it grow.

They say that a picture is worth a thousand words. Hence, we’ve made this short video and are happy to share with you some of the moments captured during the Cochrane International Mobility Programme in Croatia.

Tina Poklepović Peričić,

Co-director Cochrane Croatia

• Learn more about the Cochrane International Mobility (CIM) Programme

We have just launched Cochrane’s free, online learning modules, Cochrane Evidence Essentials. This interactive learning is freely available to anyone who is interested in an introduction to Evidence Based Medicine, Cochrane evidence, and how to use it. Here Richard Morley, Cochrane’s Consumer Engagement Officer, shares how Centres, Review Groups, and Fields can make the most of this new resource.

Today Cochrane launched Cochrane Evidence Essentials. Written from the perspective of a healthcare consumer and co-created with patients and carers, this learning resource is perfectly pitched to give anyone an introduction to Evidence Based Medicine and Systematic Review. It will be especially valuable to the growing community of patients, carers and family members who work alongside researchers to co-create Cochrane evidence.

The journey through the learning is guided by “Eleni” a fictional character, who is looking for reliable evidence to help her make informed choices. By following Eleni’s story, users can explore topics that include Evidence Based Medicine, clinical trials, systematic reviews, and how to find, understand and use Cochrane evidence. The learning is engaging and includes contributions from a wide range of subject matter experts, quizzes, short films, audio, interviews, interactive graphics, and links to further information for people who wish to learn more.

How can your Cochrane Group use this resource?

I know how hard it can be to find good resources that introduce people to the unfamiliar concepts around Evidence Based Medicine and Systematic Reviews. I think this will be a key resource for both consumers, students, and internally to those new at Cochrane. I can think of many ways Cochrane groups can use this resource…but here are my top five!

1. Post the news item on your website

We have an announcement of the launch posted on the main Cochrane.og website – you are welcome to share this on your own Cochrane Group website!

2. Share on social media

Help us share the good news of this great free resource! To make things easier we have created graphics for you to use (Instagram size too!) and have suggested tweets you can copy-and-paste to your account. It’s here in the Dropbox for you to schedule some in.

3. Incorporate it into new staff training

Evidence Essentials goes over the basics of systematic reviews but it also introduces Cochrane and it’s history. It can make an excellent introduction to Cochrane for your new staff. Consider adding this material to the items that new staff go through in their first week of orientation to help give them a good start!

4. Use it in teaching about EBM and Systematic Review

Many people at Cochrane are based at Universities and many Centres run local courses about Cochrane Systematic Reviews and other related topics. You can consider adding this into your teaching or providing a link to it as a ‘recommended resource’.

5. Share with your funders

This resource is excellent for adding to your annual reports and messaging to your funder – ask them to list it as a learning resource on their website!

I hope this gives you some ideas about how your group can use these online modules. We're pleased to hear your thoughts about the new material - we're still working on tweaking it and will be looking at translating it in the future. If you have any questions, comments or feedback about the content, please contact us at support@cochrane.org

Richard Morley
Cochrane’s Consumer Engagement Officer