Completing Your Review
Download as PPT, PDF0 likes296 views
The document outlines guidelines for completing a review handbook, emphasizing the importance of summarizing key results, implications for practice and research, and the submission process for systematic reviews. It highlights the need for concise abstracts, the coordination in the review process, and the standardized definitions for updates and amendments. Additionally, it mentions the importance of using systematic reviews to inform decision-making and acknowledges contributors to the workshop.
Completing Your Review
- 1. Completing Your Review Handbook, Chapter 12
- 2. Discussion section Organized into 5 sections (new): Summary of main results (benefits and harms) Overall completeness and applicability of evidence Quality of the evidence Potential biases in the review process Agreements and disagreements with other studies or reviews
- 3. Conclusions section Two sections: Implications for practice Reflect PICO Should not make recommendations, are not clinical practice guidelines Implications for research ‘EPICOT’ format
- 4. View in RevMan 5
- 5. Abstracts Audience: decision makers (clinicians, informed consumers, policy makers) Needs to stand alone: concise ( ≤400 words) but includes important content, do not link to other parts of the review Summarize key methods, results, conclusions -> only most important comparisons and outcomes should be summarized, not selectively those with the most significant results Refer the Handbook, Section 11.8 for guidance
- 7. Plain Language Summaries Written for consumers of healthcare Stand-alone document, freely available First draft written by authors, edited by CRGs or central support service (Cochrane Consumer Network) Contact CRG for assistance -> they will determine process Refer to the Handbook, Section 11.9 and Cochrane Manual for guidance
- 9. Submission Deadlines Every 3 months (Feb, May, Aug, Nov) But, Review Group needs review well ahead of this deadline for peer review, copyediting
- 10. Publication Possible but requires coordination No journal or other publisher can have exclusive copyright; Wiley and the Collaboration must retain the right to freely disseminate Authors should submit a review for publication after agreement from Review Group editor and before publication in CDSR Timing needs to right to avoid delaying publication in The Cochrane Library RGC handles submission and sends feedback from peer review process
- 11. Updating Systematic reviews run the risk of becoming out of date and even misleading Current recommendation - within 2 years Other reasons may trigger an update eg, important new evidence available If Review Group determines updating not needed at the 2-year mark (eg, new data emerge slowly) then is indicated in the ‘Published Notes’ section New standardized definitions for updates and amendments available ( Handbook Chapter 3 )
- 12. ‘ What’s New’ Section (RevMan view) Changes to protocol or review since last published Mandatory for each update or review amendment New standardized format
- 13. Congratulations! Now that you have completed your review… … let’s look at impact!
- 14. Use of systematic reviews Evidence base to inform decisions Research gaps – focusing research dollars Add to the empirical evidence of systematic review methodology
- 15. Cochrane for Practice - KT
- 16. Cochrane for Policy - KT
- 17. Thank you for attending our workshop! Acknowledgements for contributions to slides in this workshop: Cheryl Arratoon, CCNC Joseph Beyene, CCNC Seana Collins, CDHA, Nova Scotia Janet Joyce, CCNC (formerly) Jeremy Grimshaw, CCNC Lara Maxwell, CMSG Doug Salzwedel, EPOC (formerly) Tim Ruggles, Dalhousie University Mary Ellen Schaafsma, CCNC Adrienne Stevens, CCNC
- 18. Final Questions and Evaluation