Review development
In Cochrane people are our strength and the reason we have set the gold standard worldwide for evidence synthesis in healthcare for over two decades. In our current model of production Cochrane Review Groups provide intensive support to authors during the development of evidence synthesis through direct guidance, training, and resources.
This typically occurs at two distinct times:
Pre-submission (production of the evidence synthesis), which includes advising of different parts of the review production process, use of technology and tools and Cochrane standards.
Post-submission (editorial stages leading to publication), which includes quality assurance, peer review and manuscript development.
Under this new model, we are looking to draw a clearer distinction between Cochrane as the producer and Cochrane as the publisher of evidence syntheses.
The evidence synthesis development phase can be iterative, but it shouldn’t create negative feedback loops. It should recognise and respect the skills of people playing different roles in the process and provide clear mechanisms for how expertise can be sought, incorporated, and recognised. The pursuit of quality shouldn’t introduce complexity unnecessarily, and we need to find ways of bridging the implementation gap between theory and practice. Dedicating resource to supporting novice author teams can build capacity and identify future long-term contributors to the organisation. This can help diversify our author teams and the type of evidence we publish.”
Building on volunteer support and existing expertise
The new model must support diversity in all its forms throughout the development process – through methods, and types of evidence synthesis, but also people. Cochrane has a wealth of content and methods expertise and it’s critical that we retain and incentivize our talented Cochrane members.
To preserve the expertise that exists within the current Cochrane Review Groups as editors, peer referees, authors, patient and carer experts among others – in other words, the wider Cochrane Community – we are considering the idea of replacing the Cochrane Review Groups (which will no longer exist as review production units) with stakeholder groups that include these people but also charities, professional organisations and other relevant groups.
These stakeholder groups could be based around individual topics and have a designated leader or leadership team. The group could be both ‘inward’ and ‘outward’ looking. In the former, they could provide Cochrane with the expertise it will still need when prioritising its work, editing and refereeing submissions.
More outward facing activities for these groups could include dissemination and knowledge translation activities, as well as the promotion of evidence-based practice and systematic reviews in general, and Cochrane in particular, within their own areas of practice and influence.
The sorts of contribution stakeholder groups could make might include:
Scoping work such as gap analysis and horizon scanning
Topic prioritisation at a more granular level
Identifying potential author collaborations
Advising on knowledge translation activities
Identifying and recommending peer reviewers
Acting as a Sign-off Editor for peer reviewed manuscripts