Cargando…

Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement

BACKGROUND: Producing high-quality, relevant systematic reviews and keeping them up to date is challenging. Cochrane is a leading provider of systematic reviews in health. For Cochrane to continue to contribute to improvements in heath, Cochrane Reviews must be rigorous, reliable and up to date. We...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Turner, Tari, Green, Sally, Tovey, David, McDonald, Steve, Soares-Weiser, Karla, Pestridge, Charlotte, Elliott, Julian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5537977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28760162
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0542-3
_version_ 1783254281896329216
author Turner, Tari
Green, Sally
Tovey, David
McDonald, Steve
Soares-Weiser, Karla
Pestridge, Charlotte
Elliott, Julian
author_facet Turner, Tari
Green, Sally
Tovey, David
McDonald, Steve
Soares-Weiser, Karla
Pestridge, Charlotte
Elliott, Julian
author_sort Turner, Tari
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Producing high-quality, relevant systematic reviews and keeping them up to date is challenging. Cochrane is a leading provider of systematic reviews in health. For Cochrane to continue to contribute to improvements in heath, Cochrane Reviews must be rigorous, reliable and up to date. We aimed to explore existing models of Cochrane Review production and emerging opportunities to improve the efficiency and sustainability of these processes. METHODS: To inform discussions about how to best achieve this, we conducted 26 interviews and an online survey with 106 respondents. RESULTS: Respondents highlighted the importance and challenge of creating reliable, timely systematic reviews. They described the challenges and opportunities presented by current production models, and they shared what they are doing to improve review production. They particularly highlighted significant challenges with increasing complexity of review methods; difficulty keeping authors on board and on track; and the length of time required to complete the process. Strong themes emerged about the roles of authors and Review Groups, the central actors in the review production process. The results suggest that improvements to Cochrane’s systematic review production models could come from improving clarity of roles and expectations, ensuring continuity and consistency of input, enabling active management of the review process, centralising some review production steps; breaking reviews into smaller “chunks”, and improving approaches to building capacity of and sharing information between authors and Review Groups. Respondents noted the important role new technologies have to play in enabling these improvements. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study will inform the development of new Cochrane Review production models and may provide valuable data for other systematic review producers as they consider how best to produce rigorous, reliable, up-to-date reviews.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5537977
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55379772017-08-04 Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement Turner, Tari Green, Sally Tovey, David McDonald, Steve Soares-Weiser, Karla Pestridge, Charlotte Elliott, Julian Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: Producing high-quality, relevant systematic reviews and keeping them up to date is challenging. Cochrane is a leading provider of systematic reviews in health. For Cochrane to continue to contribute to improvements in heath, Cochrane Reviews must be rigorous, reliable and up to date. We aimed to explore existing models of Cochrane Review production and emerging opportunities to improve the efficiency and sustainability of these processes. METHODS: To inform discussions about how to best achieve this, we conducted 26 interviews and an online survey with 106 respondents. RESULTS: Respondents highlighted the importance and challenge of creating reliable, timely systematic reviews. They described the challenges and opportunities presented by current production models, and they shared what they are doing to improve review production. They particularly highlighted significant challenges with increasing complexity of review methods; difficulty keeping authors on board and on track; and the length of time required to complete the process. Strong themes emerged about the roles of authors and Review Groups, the central actors in the review production process. The results suggest that improvements to Cochrane’s systematic review production models could come from improving clarity of roles and expectations, ensuring continuity and consistency of input, enabling active management of the review process, centralising some review production steps; breaking reviews into smaller “chunks”, and improving approaches to building capacity of and sharing information between authors and Review Groups. Respondents noted the important role new technologies have to play in enabling these improvements. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study will inform the development of new Cochrane Review production models and may provide valuable data for other systematic review producers as they consider how best to produce rigorous, reliable, up-to-date reviews. BioMed Central 2017-08-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5537977/ /pubmed/28760162 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0542-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Turner, Tari
Green, Sally
Tovey, David
McDonald, Steve
Soares-Weiser, Karla
Pestridge, Charlotte
Elliott, Julian
Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
title Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
title_full Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
title_fullStr Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
title_full_unstemmed Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
title_short Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
title_sort producing cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5537977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28760162
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0542-3
work_keys_str_mv AT turnertari producingcochranesystematicreviewsaqualitativestudyofcurrentapproachesandopportunitiesforinnovationandimprovement
AT greensally producingcochranesystematicreviewsaqualitativestudyofcurrentapproachesandopportunitiesforinnovationandimprovement
AT toveydavid producingcochranesystematicreviewsaqualitativestudyofcurrentapproachesandopportunitiesforinnovationandimprovement
AT mcdonaldsteve producingcochranesystematicreviewsaqualitativestudyofcurrentapproachesandopportunitiesforinnovationandimprovement
AT soaresweiserkarla producingcochranesystematicreviewsaqualitativestudyofcurrentapproachesandopportunitiesforinnovationandimprovement
AT pestridgecharlotte producingcochranesystematicreviewsaqualitativestudyofcurrentapproachesandopportunitiesforinnovationandimprovement
AT elliottjulian producingcochranesystematicreviewsaqualitativestudyofcurrentapproachesandopportunitiesforinnovationandimprovement
AT producingcochranesystematicreviewsaqualitativestudyofcurrentapproachesandopportunitiesforinnovationandimprovement
AT producingcochranesystematicreviewsaqualitativestudyofcurrentapproachesandopportunitiesforinnovationandimprovement