Ressurser for oversiktsforfattere
Deltakelse i Cochrane-samarbeidet som oversiktsforfatter: Du kan melde deg inn i den oversiktsgruppen som er mest relevant i forhold til ditt helsefaglige interesseområde. Hvis du ikke finner en gruppe som ser relevant ut, registrer deg som interessert i å delta i en ny gruppe. Som medlem av en oversiktsgruppe får du støtte og opplæring i arbeidet med en systematisk oversikt, og et internasjonalt publikum når arbeidet ditt publisr i The Cochrane Library.
- Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions - offisiell håndbok for utarbeiding av Cochrane-oversikter
- RevMan homepage - dokumentasjon og veiledning for programvaren som benyttes for å lage og oppdatere Cochrane-oversikter.
- Cochrane Style Resource – sjekk din Cochrane-oversikt opp mot de offisielle språklige retningslinjene
- Using Individual Patient Data - Power Point-presentasjon
- Browse the list of Cochrane Review Groups
- Re-publishing of reviews - forklaring av prosedyrer og søknadsskjema for å få tillatelse til å publisere din Cochrane-oversikt I et annet vitenskapelig tidsskrift QUOROM statement checklist (PDF-dokument). Sjekkliste over ting som oversiktsforfattere kan framheve I oversikten for å forsikre leserne om påliteligheten av funnene.
Opplæring ansikt til ansikt
Kontakt Cochrane-senter eller oversiktsgrupper for informasjon om lokale workshops og kurs I hvordan lage systematiske oversikter. Noen av disse er omtalt på ”the Cochrane workshops”-siden.
Nettbasert opplæring
Open Learning Materials – lær framgangsmåten I passe store, nettbaserte moduler Dette er et supplement til Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook – til hjelp I prosessen med å ferdigstille en oversikt.
Opplæringstilbud fra andre organisasjoner:
Undertaking Systematic Reviews of Research on Effectiveness – omfattende veileder fra NHS Centre for Reviews & Dissemination
Editorial process
Titles
All review titles must be formally registered with the editorial base. To register a title contact the Assistant Review Group Co-ordinator for further information. If the proposed title falls within the scope of the ARI Group, is not already being undertaken by someone else, and is addressing a reasonable question, a Title Registration Form needs to be completed by the review authors and submitted to the Assistant Review Group Co-ordinator. Preferred format for titles is [intervention] for [health problem] in [participant group/location]. An expected date of completion for the protocol must be included. Authors not submitting a protocol within six months may have their title de-registered. From the outset, review authors should be aware of their responsibility to update and maintain their reviews after publication.
If review authors have not already done so, they should obtain a copy of the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions, which will give them guidance on matters such as developing a relevant question. This is available for download from http://www.cochrane.org/resources/handbook/
Review authors are encouraged to work with co-authors to minimise bias in the review methodology and to contribute different points of view and areas of expertise. When choosing co-authors, review authors should consider the skills needed to complete their review, for example, expertise in statistics, health economics, epidemiology, policy making. Team work is essential for the completion of a high quality review. When more than one individual is interested in doing the same review, they are encouraged to collaborate. When this is not possible, titles are registered on a 'first come, first served' basis. Alternatively, if they have the necessary expertise, they may be asked to act as a referee for the review in question. Authorship of reviews is restricted to contributors who make an active and substantial contribution (editing and design, identification of trials and quality assessment, data extraction and analysis etc.). Once a title is registered by the ARI Group, a Contact Editor is appointed to guide the review authors through to publication.
Protocols
Once the title has been accepted, the review author and co-authors will be encouraged to attend a workshop on protocol development, if they have not already done so. Review authors attending this workshop should have studied the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions and have thought about their review question or developed a draft protocol. The review authors next submit a protocol to the editorial base in RevMan i.e. using software designed for the editing of Cochrane systematic reviews, generally within six months (or as agreed with the editorial base) from submission of title. An expected date of completion for the review must be provided.
The protocol will undergo both an internal and an external refereeing process. Internal refereeing involves feedback from the Contact editor and Statistical editorial; external refereeing involves two contents experts and a consumer. This is an open process and comments returned to the editorial base are forwarded to the review authors. Additional authorities may be consulted if deemed appropriate. Every effort will be made to complete the refereeing process as quickly as possible, ideally within three weeks. The Review Group Co-ordinator will provide a summary of the comments received and ask the author to make appropriate changes to the protocol. The review authors then have three weeks in which to revise and re-submit the protocol. The final protocol will be proof-read and edited by the Review Group Co-ordinator (in consultation with the review authors), approved by the Co-ordinating Editor and Contact Editor and submitted for inclusion in the ARI Group's Module for publication in the next issue of The Cochrane Library. A permission to publish form must be completed by all review authors.
During the development of the protocol the Editorial team and editorial base will provide methodological advice and technical help. Although each review author is encouraged to have his/her own statistical support on site, the ARI Group's Statistical Editor is also happy to assist review authors with any methodological issues or queries. Review authors are welcome to visit the editorial base at any stage.
Reviews
Once the protocol has been accepted, the review authors will proceed with preparing the review. Advice on methodological issues and search strategies for clinical trials will be available from the editorial base. There will be a deadline for the submission of the review of around twelve months from the approval of the protocol but no later than two years (or as agreed with the editorial base). The finished review must be submitted to the editorial base in RevMan format. It will undergo a similar refereeing process as the protocol. Every effort will be made to complete the refereeing process as quickly as possible, ideally within three weeks. The review authors then have three weeks in which to revise and re-submit the review. The final review will be proof-read and edited by the Review Group Co-ordinator (in consultation with the review authors), approved by the Co-ordinating Editor and Contact Editor and submitted for inclusion in The Cochrane Library. A permission to publish form must be completed by all review authors. Once editorial approval has been received, the edited review is sent for inclusion in the ARI Group's module for publication in the next issue of The Cochrane Library.
During the development of the review the editorial team and editorial base will provide methodological advice and technical help. Review authors are welcome to visit the editorial base at any stage. When possible, the editorial base will assist review authors in searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the ARI Group's specialised register. The editorial base will also attempt to obtain hard copies of trials for authors on request.
Contact authors receive a free copy of The Cochrane Library once their review has been published.
Updating
Reviews should be updated every two years from the date last searched. Review authors will be responsible for scanning the medical literature at least once a year to identify any newly published trials within the scope of their review and to update their review accordingly. Review authors will also be responsible for replying to any comments or criticisms that have been received via The Cochrane Library's 'Feedback' facility. Any comments received will be summarised by the Feedback Editor who will negotiate with the review authors directly regarding required changes. Updated reviews will be peer reviewed in a manner similar to that described for reviews above. The ARI Group has adopted the Editorial process guideline as set out in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention (3.4.7). After completion of the updating process, the review should be submitted to the editorial team for further processing. There is variation across Cochrane Review Groups in policies regarding when and if updated reviews go through the process of full editorial review. If an update involves no further analysis or change of result, it may not need to be refereed.
The review author will receive support from the editorial base for the task of updating the review. All contact authors receive a free subscription to The Cochrane Library if their reviews are updated within two years from the date of last publication.
If the editorial base recognises that a review has become significantly out-of-date and the responsible review authors do not take any action, the editorial base will either consider transfering responsibility for the review to a third party or withdraw the review from The Cochrane Library. The editorial base may also consider withdrawing a review from publication if it considers it to be outdated.