Following Cochrane review protocols to completion 10 years later: a retrospective cohort study and author survey

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 111, Issue , 2019, Pages 41-48

  Runjic, Edita ^a   Behmen, Dalibora ^b   Pieper, Dawid ^c   Mathes, Tim ^c   Tricco, Andrea C ^d,e,f   Moher, David ^g   Puljak, Livia ^h,i  

^a Dubrovnik General Hospital   (Croatia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SPLIT   (Croatia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WITTEN HERDECKE   (Germany)

^d ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^f QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^g OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^h Croatian Academy of Medical Sciences Zagreb   (Croatia)

ⁱ Agency for Quality and Accreditation in Health   (Croatia)

Author keywords

Cochrane; Methodology; Publication; Review process; Review protocol; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; HUMAN; PUBLICATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CHILD; FEMALE; INFANT; LITERATURE; MALE; NEWBORN; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PUBLISHING; QUESTIONNAIRE; TIME FACTOR; WRITING; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AUTHORSHIP; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; MALE; PUBLISHING; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 85064665026     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.03.006     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Smith, R., The Cochrane Collaboration at 20 Much has been achieved, but much remains to be done. BMJ, 347, 2013, f7383.
2. Moseley, A.M., Elkins, M.R., Herbert, R.D., Maher, C.G., Sherrington, C., Cochrane reviews used more rigorous methods than non-Cochrane reviews: survey of systematic reviews in physiotherapy. J Clin Epidemiol 62 (2009), 1021–1030.
3. Collier, A., Heilig, L., Schilling, L., Williams, H., Dellavalle, R.P., Cochrane Skin Group systematic reviews are more methodologically rigorous than other systematic reviews in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 155 (2006), 1230–1235.
4. Boric, K., Dosenovic, S., Jelicic Kadic, A., Batinic, M., Cavar, M., Urlic, M., et al. Interventions for postoperative pain in children: an overview of systematic reviews. Paediatr Anaesth 27:9 (2017), 893–904.
5. Page, M.J., Shamseer, L., Altman, D.G., Tetzlaff, J., Sampson, M., Tricco, A.C., et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Med, 13(5), 2016, e1002028.
6. Tricco, A.C., Brehaut, J., Chen, M.H., Moher, D., Following 411 Cochrane protocols to completion: a retrospective cohort study. PLoS One, 3, 2008, e3684.
7. The Cochrane Library. Available at https://www.cochranelibrary.com/. Accessed April 22, 2019.
8. Green, S., Higgins, J.P.T., Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. [Chapter 2]: Preparing a Cochrane Review. 2008 Available at https://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/. (Accessed 22 April 2019)
9. Uttley, L., Montgomery, P., The influence of the team in conducting a systematic review. Syst Rev, 6(1), 2017, 149.
10. Wieseler, B., Kerekes, M.F., Vervoelgyi, V., McGauran, N., Kaiser, T., Impact of document type on reporting quality of clinical drug trials: a comparison of registry reports, clinical study reports, and journal publications. BMJ, 344, 2012, d8141.
11. Bohlius, J., Tonia, T., Nuesch, E., Juni, P., Fey, M.F., Egger, M., et al. Effects of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents on fatigue- and anaemia-related symptoms in cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analyses of published and unpublished data. Br J Cancer 111 (2014), 33–45.
12. Golder, S., Loke, Y.K., Bland, M., Unpublished data can be of value in systematic reviews of adverse effects: methodological overview. J Clin Epidemiol 63 (2010), 1071–1081.
13. Hartling, L., Featherstone, R., Nuspl, M., Shave, K., Dryden, D.M., Vandermeer, B., Grey literature in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of the contribution of non-English reports, unpublished studies and dissertations to the results of meta-analyses in child-relevant reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol, 17, 2017, 64.
14. Rohner, E., Grabik, M., Tonia, T., Juni, P., Petavy, F., Pignatti, F., et al. Does access to clinical study reports from the European Medicines Agency reduce reporting biases? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the effect of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in cancer patients. PLoS One, 12, 2017, e0189309.
15. Spurling, G., Mitchell, B., van Driel, M., Unlocking the value of Cochrane reviews for general practitioners. Aust J Gen Pract 47:6 (2018), 333–336.
16. Duchen, M.R., Valdeolmillos, M., O'Neill, S.C., Eisner, D.A., Effects of metabolic blockade on the regulation of intracellular calcium in dissociated mouse sensory neurones. J Physiol 424 (1990), 411–426.