Cochrane News

Cochrane seeks Systems & Product Development Editor

2 years 1 month ago

Location: Flexible location (remote working) in the UK.
Specifications: Permanent contract.
Hours: Full-time week 37.5 hours.
Salary: £52,000 per annum.
Application Closing Date: 25 April

The Systems and Product Development Editor will provide strategic editorial and methods leadership to other departments to ensure editorial and methods strategy is reflected in Cochrane’s products, processes and technology.

The key purpose of the role is to deliver cross-departmental strategic objectives and targets by:

  1. Working closely with the Head of Change Management and Deputy Editor in Chief to help develop and deliver technological elements of Cochrane’s strategy for review production
  2. Providing editorial and methods oversight to align review production developments with Cochrane’s product development strategy
  3. Providing editorial and methods oversight to develop Cochrane’s review production systems and processes to deliver the review production strategy
  4. Engaging with members of the Cochrane community to help develop new products, systems and tools

Cochrane is a global, independent network of health practitioners, researchers, patient advocates and others, responding to the challenge of making vast amounts of research evidence useful for informing decisions about health. We do this by synthesizing research findings to produce the best available evidence on what can work, what might harm and where more research is needed. Our work is recognised as the international gold standard for high quality, trusted information.

Wednesday, April 13, 2022 Category: Jobs
Lydia Parsonson

Cochrane seeks Managing Editor

2 years 1 month ago

Specifications: Full Time (Fixed Term/Consultancy role)
Salary: circa £40,000 per annum
Location: Flexible
Application Closing Date:  Sunday 13 March 2022

Cochrane has established a centrally-resourced Editorial Service to support the efficient and timely publication of high-quality systematic reviews in the Cochrane Library. The reviews that are published through the Central Editorial Service address some of the research questions considered to be the most important to decision makers.

The Central Editorial Service is also running a pilot of approaches to increase editorial efficiency and integrity within Cochrane. The Managing Editor role will play a key role in operationalising this pilot.

Reporting to the Executive Editor of the Central Editorial Service, the Managing Editor will manage the editorial process of protocols and reviews submitted to the Central Editorial Service. The role-holder should be alert to the demands of delivering high-quality review content for publication in a timely fashion, and work to ensure that deadlines can be met.   

Cochrane is a global, independent network of health practitioners, researchers, patient advocates and others, responding to the challenge of making vast amounts of research evidence useful for informing decisions about health. We do this by synthesizing research findings to produce the best available evidence on what can work, what might harm and where more research is needed. Our work is recognised as the international gold standard for high quality, trusted information. An understanding of Cochrane’s work and health research more generally is an advantage, but not essential.

The majority of Cochrane Central Executive staff are located in London, UK, however flexible location or a part-time appointment are possible for the right candidate.

How to apply

  • For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here
  • The deadline to receive your application is by Sunday 13 March. 
  • The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples. Note that we will assess applications as they are received, and therefore may fill the post before the deadline.
Tuesday, March 1, 2022 Category: Jobs
Lydia Parsonson

Cochrane's 2022 International Women’s Day Events

2 years 1 month ago

In recognition of International Women's Day (IWD) happening March 8th, Cochrane will be hosting several events and activities. The IWD 2022 theme is “breaking gender bias and reducing stereotypes and discrimination to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

The Annual Anne Anderson Walk is a cherished annual social event in Cochrane, where attendees walk to celebrate women's contributions to Cochrane while raising money to annual Anne Anderson Award.  Everyone is welcome to snap a picture of themselves and share their walk with the Community. Pictures will be posted on social media and the website as we encourage each other to get out on a walk - everyone is welcome to join in! 

Calling all science communicators and artists! Cochrane will be hosting an exciting challenge in collaboration with Lifeology. We would like to see your art and graphics that illustrate the IWD theme in relation to healthcare and/or evidence synthesis. 

Top submissions will be promoted on Cochrane social media pages and platforms, and the winner will be announced as part of the Cochrane US Women’s Day Panel and with an interview news item on Cochrane.org.  The winning graphic will also be used for a tote bag and mug, with credit to the creator, and will be available for purchase in the Cochrane Store.

Submission criteria:

  • Graphic should resonates with evidence synthesis / health science and this year’s IWD theme.  
  • .png file type preferred, full colour,  high resolution graphic with a DPI of 150
  • Follow @Cochrane_US on Twitter 
  • Email submission to tduque@cochrane.org with subject “IWD Graphic Submission”
  • Accepted until March 7, 2022

 

Join Cochrane US and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for an enlightening and informative panel to highlight gender bias in health science and evidence synthesis. The panel will talk about their career, history, motivations, and encounters with gender bias.

Join Cochrane US and Cochrane Early Career Professionals Network (ECP) for an interactive hour of chats and speed networking.  Find out more about Cochrane, EPCs, and meet one-on-one virtually.  You'll get the opportunity to network with other attendees, with each random introduction only lasting 3 minutes. 

Únase a este evento especial gratuito con oradores de América Latina y España. Organizado por los participantes del Cochrane US Mentoring Program.

Friday, March 4, 2022
Muriah Umoquit

Cochrane Skin seeks 2 Systematic Reviewers - Nottingham, UK

2 years 1 month ago

Specifications: Fixed term post until 31 March 2023. Part or full-time. 
Location: Nottingham, UK
Salary: £27924 to £40927 per annum
Application deadline:
16 Feb 2022

A new opportunity has arisen for two Systematic Reviewers to join the Cochrane Skin team at its editorial base within the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology (CEBD), School of Medicine, University of Nottingham. CEBD has an international reputation for research into the prevention and treatment of skin disease with a focus on delivering independent clinical research that informs the NHS.

Cochrane Skin is part of the international Cochrane organisation, and is the editorial base for the preparation and dissemination of Cochrane systematic reviews on the treatment and prevention of skin diseases. It is one of 62 Cochrane review groups worldwide which contribute to Cochrane, and this busy editorial base currently has around 20 review teams preparing protocols or reviews for publication or updating published reviews. In working as a Systematic Reviewer, you will lead and support systematic reviews within the Cochrane Skin portfolio in order to ensure the delivery of high-quality, timely evidence synthesis to support healthcare decision-making. You will be responsible for working with review teams to support title screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and contributing to the write-up of Cochrane Skin systematic reviews, and will ensure that your work adheres to relevant methodological guidance. 

They are seeking an individual with proven knowledge and experience of involvement in systematic reviews e.g. by participating as an author in a Cochrane systematic review or conducting a systematic review as a lead author. You should possess a good understanding of systematic review procedures, including knowledge of risk of bias assessment with an ability to critically appraise clinical trials. Excellent verbal and written communication skills, organisational skills and the ability to evaluate published clinical trial manuscripts are also essential. They particularly welcome applications from candidates with knowledge of Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 methodology.

Wednesday, February 2, 2022 Category: Jobs
Muriah Umoquit

Cochrane seeks Software Test Engineer

2 years 1 month ago

Specifications: Permanent, Full time
Salary:
circa £55,000 per annum
Location:
Copenhagen
Application deadline:
14 February 2022

Are you passionate about quality software? Do you have a drive to make a difference for health care world-wide?
We are a global, independent organization that strives to inform health-care decisions every day. We gather and summarize the best evidence from research to help doctors, nurses, patients, carers, researchers, funders, and policymakers. We do not accept commercial or conflicted funding, and work to minimize risk of bias, in order to generate authoritative and reliable information.

Our development team is located in Copenhagen and supports the process of creating systematic reviews through a web-based application. We are a group of motivated, mission-driven people who are energized by working together. We care about our users, taking pride in delivering features which both ensure the quality of Cochrane systematic reviews and make review production easier and more efficient.

As our software test engineer, you'd be leading the testing of our software, as well as helping us upgrade and build automated tests for our product. Our goal is to maintain product development velocity while having confidence in the quality of our code.

Who we’re after
We are primarily looking for someone motivated by the mission of Cochrane and of our development team – that is, someone who cares about facilitating improved evidence-based healthcare decisions. We would consider it a bonus if you have specific knowledge of Cochrane, evidence-based health care, systematic reviews, and/or the global health sector.

On a technical level, we are looking for an analytical and efficient problem solver that can challenge our product and the processes around it, with experience in designing and implementing test strategies for web applications in an Agile setting.

We work in English.

What you'd be doing

  • Working with a talented, passionate and collaborative agile team;
  • Advocating cross-team to ensure quality-minded practices;
  • Designing, implementing, and maintaining automatic and manual test solutions.

How to apply

  • For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here. 
  • The deadline to receive your application is by 14 February 2022. 
  • The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples. Note that we will assess applications as they are received, and therefore may fill the post before the deadline.
Wednesday, February 2, 2022 Category: Jobs
Lydia Parsonson

Cochrane seeks Software Developer

2 years 1 month ago

Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Specifications:
Permanent contract
Hours:
Full-time week (flexible working considered) – 37.5 hours
Salary:
£55,500 per annum
Application Closing Date:
14 February (Midnight GMT Time)

Are you passionate about quality software? Do you have a drive to make a difference for health care world-wide?
We are a global, independent organization that strives to inform health-care decisions every day. We gather and summarize the best evidence from research to help doctors, nurses, patients, carers, researchers, funders, and policymakers. We do not accept commercial or conflicted funding, and work to minimize risk of bias, in order to generate authoritative and reliable information.

Our development team is located in Copenhagen and supports the process of creating systematic reviews through a web-based application. We are a group of motivated, mission-driven people who are energized by working together. We care about our users, taking pride in delivering features which both ensure the quality of Cochrane systematic reviews and make review production easier and more efficient.

As our new software developer, you'd contribute to the design and development of the web-based software used by thousands of Cochrane authors to produce systematic reviews, which includes tools and integrations for writing, statistical analysis, data management, study curation, data extraction, and more. Due to the fast-paced nature of our release cycle, the team interact frequently with users and other stakeholders.

Who we’re after
We are primarily looking for someone motivated by the mission of Cochrane and of our development team – that is, someone who cares about facilitating improved evidence-based healthcare decisions. We would consider it a bonus if you have specific knowledge of Cochrane, evidence-based health care, systematic reviews, and/or the global health sector.

On a technical level, we are looking for an analytical and efficient problem solver that can challenge our product and the processes around it, with experience in designing and building web applications in an Agile setting.

We work in English.

What you'd be doing

  • Working with a talented, passionate and collaborative agile team;
  • Designing, developing, testing, and maintaining our review production systems;
  • Achieving and maintaining a high level of automated test coverage;
  • Helping to drive continuous improvement of product, code, and processes.

For further information on the job description and how to apply, please click here. 

  • The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples. Note that we will assess applications as they are received, and therefore may fill the post before the deadline.
  • Deadline for applications: 14 February 2022 (Midnight GMT).
  • Interviews to be held on: W/C 28 February 2022 (times and exact dates to be confirmed).
Wednesday, February 2, 2022 Category: Jobs
Lydia Parsonson

Interview with authors of Hip Fracture reviews

2 years 1 month ago

In this interview, we learn more about a series of reviews on hip fractures published on the Cochrane Library and talk to some of the authors behind this work Prof Xavier Griffin and orthopaedic surgeons Mr William Eardley and Mr Martyn Parker.

Tell us how did these reviews come about?
This work was funded by the National Institute of Health Research Systematic Reviews programme, as a joint application from Oxford University and Cochrane’s Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group. The underlying concept was that there is diverse, congested and complex literature of varying quality around hip fracture and it can be hard to interpret. We wanted to improve on that and provide useful, actionable statements of the evidence for patients, clinicians and researchers.

Studies are being accumulated very quickly in this field compared to other areas of orthopaedics and the reviews that were in the Cochrane Library were out of date and had various limitations. We were aware that NICE would be reviewing and updating its guidance on the management of hip fracture in adults in 2022 so this was a timely piece of work that would link closely with work at NICE. We were in touch with them along the process sharing the questions for which patients and clinicians wanted answers, as well as sharing findings with them.

Were patients involved?
We carried out scoping work with patients and experts in this field to work out what the priority review topics would be - there could have been a hundred, but we worked together to reduce it down to what was most important. We shared this with NICE to help shape their update. This involvement of patients and their views was not happening when we all started out in this field, it is now so much more patient influenced, which is a good thing for those giving and those receiving treatment and care.



We approached these reviews as informative pieces of work giving direction to guidelines, clinical practice and research rather than being static sources of information - they feed into knowledge and then clinical practice.

Who will find these studies most useful?
Clinicians, surgeons, and trainee surgeons will find these reviews most useful as they provide the gold standard answers to questions they want answered.

The studies are also an important part of the puzzle in terms of informing what might be commissioned for research later.

We hope patients will see an improvement in their care as a result of these reviews as they give an evidence-based anchors for clinician’s recommendations.  NICE will also have these studies available to them when they update their guidance on this topic.

In the UK we have something called the National Hip Fracture Database, it audits treatment in this area, how many hip replacements take place in the UK for example. With these reviews they can report practice against best evidence which is good for patients, good for commissioners and good for people planning service delivery in their hospitals.

Who was involved?
Our success in securing this grant and the reviews done to date builds on very strong networks,
we've got a pretty research active and research savvy community partly through the work of Orthopaedic Trauma Society and the Fragility Fracture Network – we drew on this network to pull this work together. This research collaboration is what we’d like to see fostered going forwards.

These reviews were synchronised with current large trials and NICE updating their guidelines and as such they are an important piece of work to inform the wider picture and influence practice; not only in terms of influencing what treatment is given but influencing how best to study a topic – this is a shift in culture. These reviews should stand the test of time for the next ten years because they have been performed with methodological rigour and include the latest trial data.

You included very recent large landmark trials, how?
We did not want to publish Cochrane reviews that were out of date quickly. We were able to include a very large landmark new trial (WHITE5) in two of these reviews because we were aware of what each other was doing – we were in touch with each other - and we were able to access trial data prior to publication. We don’t work in a siloed way, and this has great benefit.

What value do these studies have for funders?
This body of work will help funders know where to place their funding to get maximum benefit on that spend – there are certain surgeries we can say should no longer happen and those areas no longer need to be studied.

Monday, February 14, 2022
Lydia Parsonson

Cochrane seeks Financial Accountant

2 years 2 months ago

Location: Flexible location (remote working) in the UK.
Specifications: Permanent contract.
Hours: Full-time week (flexible working considered) – 37.5 hours.
Salary: £42,000 per annum.
Application Closing Date: 07 April (Midnight GMT Time)

This role is an exciting opportunity to use your financial knowledge and problem-solving skills to make a difference in the field of health care research.  

The Financial Accountant is responsible for supporting the day-to-day management and the smooth running of the financial accounting operations of Cochrane, which includes leading on financial accounting processes, balance sheet reconciliations and supporting the international payroll.  The jobholder will have an important role to create and shape the financial procedures, improve processes, outputs, and analysis for stakeholders.

You will have a minimum of 3-5 years’ experience in a similar finance role with a recognised qualification. Part-qualified candidates with particularly strong experience will be considered and supported.

Cochrane is a global, independent network of health practitioners, researchers, patient advocates and others, responding to the challenge of making vast amounts of research evidence useful for informing decisions about health. We do this by synthesizing research findings to produce the best available evidence on what can work, what might harm and where more research is needed. Our work is recognised as the international gold standard for high quality, trusted information.

  • For further information on the job description and how to apply, please click here 
  • The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples. Note that we will assess applications as they are received, and therefore may fill the post before the deadline.
  • Deadline for applications: 07 April 2022 (Midnight GMT).
Friday, March 25, 2022 Category: Jobs
Lydia Parsonson

Featured review: Low-carbohydrate versus balanced-carbohydrate diets for reducing weight and cardiovascular risk

2 years 2 months ago

Low‐carbohydrate versus balanced‐carbohydrate diets for reducing weight and cardiovascular risk

Key messages

  • There is probably little to no difference in the weight lost by people following low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets (also known as 'low-carb diets') compared to the weight lost by people following balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets, for up to two years.
  • Similarly, there is probably little to no difference between the diets for changes in heart disease risks, like diastolic blood pressure, glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c, a measure of blood sugar levels over 2-3 months) and LDL cholesterol (‘unhealthy’ cholesterol) up to two years.
  • This was the case in people with and without type 2 diabetes.

What are low-carbohydrate and balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets?
People spend lots of money on trying to lose weight using diets, products, foods and books, and continue to debate about which diets are effective and safe. So, examining the scientific evidence behind claims made is important. Low-carbohydrate diets are a broad category of weight-reducing diets that manipulate and restrict carbohydrates, protein and fat in diets. There are no consistent, widely-accepted definitions of these diets and different descriptions are used (e.g. 'low-carbohydrate, high-protein’, 'low-carbohydrate, high-fat', or ‘very low-carbohydrate’).

Low-carbohydrate diets are implemented in different ways, but they restrict grains, cereals and legumes, and other carbohydrate-containing foods; such as dairy, most fruit and certain vegetables. These foods are then typically replaced with foods higher in fat and protein; such as meats, eggs, cheese, butter, cream, oils. Some low-carbohydrate diets recommend eating as desired, while others recommend restricting the amount of energy eaten.

Balanced-carbohydrate diets contain more moderate amounts of carbohydrates, protein and fats, in line with current healthy eating advice from health authorities. When used for weight reduction, balanced diets recommend restricting the amount of energy eaten by guiding people to reduce their portion sizes and choose healthier foods (e.g. lean instead of fatty meat).

Low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets are widely promoted, marketed and commercialised as being more effective for weight loss, and healthier, than 'balanced'-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets.


Professor Celeste Naude explains, "The weight lost by people on low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets was similar to the weight lost by those on balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets, for up to two years. Changes in heart disease risk factors were also similar in people following these diets for between one and two years. This was the case in people with and without type 2 diabetes.

"The longest of the trials lasted for two years, so we do not know if there are differences between the effects and safety of these diets beyond two years, which would be especially important for heart disease risk factors.

Most of the people in the trials did not have heart disease or related risks at the start of the studies, so we do not know if there are differences between the effects and safety of these diets in people with heart disease or risk factors, such as conditions that cause abnormal levels of fats in the blood.

Our review did not compare type or quality of carbohydrates, fats or proteins between the diets, or costs between the diets.”


What did the review authors want to find out?
They wanted to find out if low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets were better for weight loss and heart disease risk factors than balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets in adults who were overweight or living with obesity.

They wanted to find this out for people with and without type 2 diabetes.

What did they do?
They searched six electronic databases and trial registries for all trials* that compared low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets with balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets in adults who were overweight or living with obesity. The trials had to last for at least three months. The authors compared and summarised the results of the trials and rated the confidence in the combined evidence, based on factors such as study methods and sizes.

*A trial is a type of study in which participants are assigned randomly to two or more treatment groups. This is the best way to ensure similar groups of participants.

What did they find?
The authors found 61 trials involving 6925 people who were overweight or living with obesity. The biggest trial was in 419 people and the smallest was in 20 people. All except one of the trials were conducted in high-income countries worldwide, and nearly half were undertaken in the US (n=26).

Most trials were undertaken in people who did not have heart disease or risk factors (n = 36). Most people (n = 5118) did not have type 2 diabetes.

The average starting weight of people across the trials was 95 kg. Most studies lasted for six months or less (n = 37); and the longest studies (n = 6) lasted for two years.

Main results
Low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets probably result in little to no difference in weight loss over the short term (trials lasting 3 to 8.5 months) and long term (trials lasting one to two years) compared to balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets, in people with and without type 2 diabetes.

In the short term, the average difference in weight loss was about 1 kg and in the long term, the average difference was less than 1 kg.

People lost weight on both diets in some trials. The amount of weight lost on average varied greatly with both diets across the trials from less than 1 kg in some trials and up to about 12 kg in others in the short term and long term.

Similarly, low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets probably result in little to no difference in diastolic blood pressure, glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and LDL cholesterol (‘unhealthy’ cholesterol) for up to two years.

The authors could not draw any conclusions about side effects reported by participants because very few trials reported these.

What are the limitations of the evidence?
The authors are moderately confident in the evidence. Confidence was lowered mainly because of concerns about how some the trials were conducted, which included that many trials did not report all their results. Further research may change these results.

How up to date is this evidence?
The evidence is up-to-date to June 2021.

What gaps did the authors identify?
They do not know if there are differences between the effects and safety of these diets beyond two years.

Since most of the people in the trials did not have heart disease or heart disease risks when they were recruited, the authors do not know if there are differences between the effects and safety of these diets in people with heart disease or risk factors, such as conditions that cause abnormal levels of fats in the blood.

What important related questions were not addressed in this review?
The author team did not compare type or quality of carbohydrates, fats or proteins between the diets. They also did not examine differences in costs between the diets.

Friday, January 28, 2022
Lydia Parsonson

What is an infodemic and how can we prevent it?: a Lifeology and Cochrane collaboration

2 years 2 months ago

In this free Lifeology course, learn what an infodemic is and what you can do to slow and prevent the spread of misinformation. 

Lifeology’s tagline is ‘The place where science and art converge’. They offer a platform that brings together scientists, artists, and storytellers to help people better understand and engage with science and health information and research. One of the main ways they meet their objectives is through beautifully illustrated, science-backed, bite-sized ‘flashcard’ courses about science and health-related topics aimed at the general public and students.

Image from the Lifeology's 'What is an infodemic and how can we prevent it?' course

For World Evidence-Based Healthcare (EBHC) Day, they collaborated with Cochrane to create a free course. The 41 slides walk the user through the  story of Ronald who has been misguided by misinformation and teaches what an infodemic is and how to slow the spread of misinformation.

Image from the Lifeology's 'What is an infodemic and how can we prevent it?' course

Paige Jarreau, co-founder of Lifeology, said "At Lifeology, we believe that science communication in any format, including our flashcard courses, is far better when it is the product of collaboration between scientists and professional creatives like storytellers and artists. We were pleased to be able to work closely with people from Cochrane to create this course on infodemics. We've produced a beautifully illustrated free course that is practical in its tips to combat misinformation and accessible through its plain language, empathetic storytelling and relatable imagery  - it's also available in English, French, German, Malay, Simplified Chinese, and Spanish !"

Image from the Lifeology's 'What is an infodemic and how can we prevent it?' course

Jordan Collver, the illustrator of the Lifeology course, said "This was an exciting project to work on. We had some fun with metaphors and with well known memes in this course while keeping the story empathic and relatable in a global context.'

View the Lifeology course 'what is an infodemic and how we can prevent it?' in:

Learn more about Lifeology: 

Thursday, June 2, 2022
Muriah Umoquit

What's the accuracy of crowdsourcing the screening of search results? Help Cochrane find out!

2 years 2 months ago

Cochrane Crowd is a citizen science platform  where a global community of volunteers help to classify the research needed to support informed decision-making about healthcare. Cochrane Crowd volunteers review descriptions of research studies to identify and classify clinical trials.

 A new task has just gone live on Cochrane Crowd. It is a citation screening task that we are doing in partnership with The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute (THIS Institute).

It forms a part of a methodological study that aims to assess the accuracy of crowdsourcing the screening of search results. Unlike some of the previous studies we’ve done, this one is a little bit different. Instead of asking you to assess a record for possible relevance, we want you to assess it for irrelevance! Our hypothesis is that a crowd can still make a big difference in weeding out the obviously irrelevant records, and that by framing the task in this way, we will reduce the chances of possibly relevant records being rejected.

Are you up for joining this task? If so, head to crowd.cochrane.org and log in. On your tasks page you should see a task called: Training for healthcare professionals in electronic fetal monitoring using cardiotocograph.



We are going to run this study as a randomised study. When you click on the training module, you will be randomised to one of three tasks. Each of the three tasks will look exactly the same. The difference between the three tasks is the agreement algorithm in the background. This algorithm provides a ‘final’ classification on a record based on a certain number and order of individual classifications made by contributors. We are testing three different agreement algorithms as part of this methodological study.

There is of course a training module. It should only take around 10-15 minutes to complete. Once done you will be able to screen some ‘real’ records. Do as many as you like. If you manage to do 250 or more, you will get named acknowledgement in any write-ups of this methods study and be able to download a certificate.


As always, this kind of work would not be possible without the help of this fantastic community. If you are able to take part, then thank you very much indeed from the teams at THIS Institute and Cochrane Crowd.

If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with me: anna.noel-storr@rdm.ox.ac.uk

With best wishes to all and happy citation screening!

Anna and Sarah

Friday, January 14, 2022
Lydia Parsonson

Cochrane seeks Chief Executive Officer

2 years 2 months ago

Location: UK based role with occasional global travel
Salary: £110-120,000 per annum
Contract type: Permanent
Date closing: 06/02/2022

Cochrane is a global independent community of more than 100,000 people who search for and summarize the best evidence from health and care research to help our beneficiaries make informed choices about health and care.  

Our members and supporters come from more than 220 countries worldwide including researchers, health professionals, patients, carers, and people passionate about improving health and care outcomes for everyone, everywhere.

Chief Executive
£110, 120,000 per annum
UK based role with occasional global travel

Cochrane’s work providing accessible, credible information to improve global health - has never been more important or relevant than it is today.

This Chief Executive role is an extraordinary opportunity for an inspirational, experienced and authentic leader, passionate about evidence and health care, to join Cochrane and work with a highly committed and engaged Board and talented staff team to lead the development of a new long-term strategy.

We are seeking someone with experience working in a multi-stakeholder environment, ideally in a global context, with exceptional interpersonal and communication skills with proven capacity to develop influential internal and external relationships.  Thoughtful, curious, and with a supportive leadership style; you will bring a strong track record of leading teams; fostering a high-performing culture; driving organisational change and growing income.  Critically, you will share our vision of a world of better health for all people where decisions about health and care are informed by high-quality evidence.

Cochrane is a global community and we value the diverse range of experience that this brings.  We strive to be an equal opportunities employer and welcome application from people from all races, religions, genders, sexual orientation, lived experience or ability.

  • For further information, the role and how to apply please download the full appointment brief here  
  • Closing Date: Sunday 6th February 2022
  • If you require this document in an alternative format, please contact executiveadmin@prospect-us.co.uk or call 020 7691 1920
Thursday, January 13, 2022 Category: Jobs
Lydia Parsonson

Research Integrity: making sure medical trials reported in the scientific literature are real

2 years 2 months ago

Senior Research Integrity Editor, Lisa Bero, discusses this subject in a recent Nature article.

Never has it been more important to foster trust in scientific evidence than in the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Cochrane is committed to independence, transparency, and integrity in healthcare research. The Research Integrity Team works to support and strengthen this commitment through research, policy development and implementation, advocacy and community outreach.

Recently, Senior Research Integrity Editor, Lisa Bero, has written a World View in Nature on the topic of working together to tackle the issue of problematic studies – studies where there are serious concerns about the trustworthiness of the data or findings. In the article she explains the tools and resources Cochrane uses as described in its policy for ‘Managing potentially problematic studies’, to empower reviewers to act when they suspect an issue. 

Research Integrity Editor, Stephanie Boughton, says “It was great to highlight Cochrane’s leading work in this area. We are building upon Cochrane’s strong history of conducting meta-research to detect research integrity problems. I hope all systematic review authors take up Lisa’s call to action and use tools described in Cochrane’s policy for ‘Managing potential problematic studies’ when they suspect an issue.”

Wednesday, January 19, 2022
Lydia Parsonson

Measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid review

2 years 4 months ago

This review provides insight into the effectiveness of measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.

While there are limitations to this review, the review demonstrates that a range of different measures can be effective at reducing COVID-19 transmission, especially when multiple interventions are implemented together. Importantly, the review demonstrates that schools can stay open (or reopen) safely when prevention measures are implemented effectively. The effectiveness of interventions is influenced by many things, including the levels of community transmission. Given the rapid and widespread advancements in prevention and containment measures, most notably, the COVID-19 vaccines and increases in testing capacity, as well as the rise of more transmissible variants of the virus, an update to this review may yield very different results.

What was studied in the review?
In order to reduce the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, many governments and societies put mitigation measures in place in schools. However, we do not know whether these measures work with regards to reducing the spread of the virus, or how these measures affect other aspects of life, such as education, the economy or society as a whole.

Key messages
Reopening schools or keeping schools open while having a broad range of measures in place can reduce transmission of the virus that causes COVID-19. Such measures can also reduce the number of people who will need to go to hospital due to developing COVID-19. However very little is known about other consequences of these measures, such as those linked to education, resources, and physical or mental health, as this knowledge is mostly based on studies modelling the real world. More studies set in the real world using real-world data are needed.

Lead author Shari Krishnaratne explains:

“This review provides insight into the effectiveness of measures implemented in schools to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Whilst the review addresses a very important question there are limitations to the evidence it provides. We searched for studies for the review in December 2020, at a time when there was a lack of real-world evidence. As such, most of the studies included in this review use modelling. This review therefore shows an overall absence of real-world evidence about the effectiveness of these measures. However, there is enough evidence from the modelling studies and in other reviews such as one on travel measures for us to have some confidence that there is likely to be a positive effect on transmission, but how an intervention works in one location might not be the same as in another.
 
There are limitations to the evidence, but it does suggest that schools can stay open (or reopen) safely when prevention measures are implemented effectively. The effectiveness of interventions is influenced by many things, including the levels of community transmission. Given the rapid and widespread advancements in prevention and containment measures, most notably, the COVID-19 vaccines and increases in testing capacity, as well as the rise of more transmissible variants of the virus, an update to this review may yield very different results.”

What are measures implemented in the school setting?
Measures in the school setting can be grouped into the following four broad categories.

  1. Measures reducing the opportunity for contacts: by reducing the number of students in a class or a school, opening certain school types only (for example primary schools) or by creating a schedule by which students attend school on different days or in different weeks, the face-to-face contact between students can be reduced.
  2. Measures making contacts safer: by putting measures in place such as face masks, improving ventilation by opening windows or using air purifiers, cleaning, handwashing, or modifying activities like sports or music, contacts can be made safer.
  3. Surveillance and response measures: screening for symptoms or testing sick or potentially sick students, or teachers, or both, and putting them into isolation (for sick people) or quarantine (for potentially sick people).
  4. Multicomponent measures: measures from categories 1, 2 and 3 are combined.

What is the aim of the review?
The authors aimed to find out which measures implemented in the school setting allow schools to safely reopen, stay open, or both, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

What did we do?
They searched for studies that looked at the impact of these types of measures in the school setting on the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, the impact on the healthcare system (i.e. how many hospital beds are needed), as well as important social aspects (i.e. how often students attended school). The studies could focus on students, teachers and other school staff, as well as on families and the whole community. They could use real-life data (observational studies) or data from computer-generated simulations (modelling studies).

View the video in German, French, or Spanish

What are the main results of the review?
The authors found 38 relevant studies. Most of these were modelling studies (33 studies). Five studies used real-world data. Twenty studies were conducted in North or South America, 16 in Europe and two in China.

Below we summarise the main findings by category.

  1. Measures reducing the opportunity for contacts
    The authors found 23 modelling studies assessing measures to reduce the opportunity for contacts. All studies showed reductions in the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19 and the use of the healthcare system. Some studies also showed a reduction in the number of days spent in school due to the intervention.
  2. Measures making contacts safer
    The authors found 11 modelling studies and two real-world studies looking at measures, such as mask wearing in schools, cleaning, handwashing, and ventilation. Five of these studies combined multiple measures, which means we cannot see which specific measures worked and which did not. Most studies showed reductions in the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19; some studies, however, showed mixed or no effects.
  3. Surveillance and response measures
    We found 13 modelling studies and one real-world study assessing surveillance and response measures. Twelve studies focused on mass testing and isolation measures, while two looked specifically at symptom-based screening and isolation. Most studies showed results in favour of the intervention, however some showed mixed or no effects
  4. Multicomponent measures
    They found three studies that looked at multicomponent interventions, where it was not possible to determine the effect of each individual intervention. These included one modelling study and two real-world studies. These studies assessed physical distancing, modification of activities, cancellation of sports or music classes, testing, exemption of high-risk students, handwashing, and face masks. Most studies showed reduced transmission of the virus that causes COVID-19, however some showed mixed or no effects.

How confident are we in the findings of this review?
Confidence in these results is limited. Most studies used models, that is, they estimated the effects of the interventions rather than observing outcomes. As the models are built on assumptions about how the virus spreads and how people behave, we lack real-world evidence. Many studies were published as 'preprints' without undergoing rigorous checks of published studies, which further limits confidence. Also, the studies were very different from each other (for example, with regards to the levels of transmission in the community).

How up to date is this evidence?
The evidence is up-to-date to December 2020. It is expected this review will be updated in Spring 2022.

Monday, January 17, 2022
Lydia Parsonson

2021 Journal Impact Factor for Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews is 12.008

2 years 8 months ago

The 2021 Journal Citation Report has been released by Clarivate Analytics, and we are delighted to announce that the Journal Impact Factor for the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) is now 12.008. This is an increase on the 2020 Journal Impact Factor, which was 9.289.

The CDSR Journal Impact Factor is calculated by taking the total number of citations in a given year to all Cochrane Reviews published in the past two years and dividing that number by the total number of Reviews published in the past two years. While Journal Impact Factor is a useful measure of average citation frequency, we recognize that it is not the only measure of success or impact.  

Some highlights from the CDSR 2021 Journal Citation Report:

  • CDSR is ranked 19th of the 172 journals in the Medicine, General & Internal category
  • CDSR received 92,845 cites in the 2021 Journal Impact Factor period, compared with 81,212 in 2020 
  • The 5-Year Journal Impact Factor is 11.956 compared with 9.871 in 2020

Cochrane Library’s Editor in Chief, Karla Soares-Weiser, commented: “I am delighted to see a rise in Impact Factor for the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Cochrane’s efforts to publish high quality reviews on COVID-19 have clearly made an impact, as several of these make up our top 20 cited reviews for 2021. All of these data demonstrate the continuing usage and impact of Cochrane Reviews and reflect enormous credit on our many thousands of contributors and groups.”

 

Thursday, June 30, 2022
Muriah Umoquit

Cochrane speaks with the Science Basement Podcast

2 years 10 months ago

The Science Basement Podcast is a podcast hosted by young scientists and scientists-in-training who share their excitement about science and science communication. They have conversations with scientists and other guests with the aim of making complicated ideas understandable to non-scientists, while showing why science matters.

Here we highlight some episodes where they talked to people in the Cochrane Community: 

Let's talk about an epidemic of misinformation Episode 5 with Anastasiia & Eleanna with guest Tiffany

Tell us if you are not confused when you scroll your newsfeed or change TV channels and see a whole array of opinions on each and every topic. One example you can probably relate to is the COVID crisis: vaccines or no vaccines, masks or no masks - which information is true? Who should we listen to in the end?

 

The name of this problem is “infodemic”. It means just what you think it means. In this episode, we are talking to Tiffany Duque, a senior advisor at Cochrane, about infodemic, expanding to the topic of misinformation in research and how to manage it.

In 2021, they spoke with members of Cochrane over three episodes:

Episode 1 - Cochrane Reviews in times of COVID-19 with Dr John Lavis

Tomàs Garnier  Artiñano and  Lea Urpa interview Dr. John Lavis. John is a member of the Cochrane editorial board, member of the Cochrane knowledge-translation advisory group, and founder and director of the McMaster Health Forum, which hosts COVID-END. John speaks about what we know about COVID-19 so far, the importance of evidence synthesis and Living Systematic Reviews, how the media covers science, and Cochrane's Plain Language Summaries, translation work, and how Cochrane works with patients and careers. 

 Episode 2 -  Systematic Reviews: How do scientists collect information? 

Giuliano Didio and Elmo Saarentaus discuss with the Cochrane Reveiwer Fiona Stewart about what is a systematic review and... how to make one. Fiona is a Network Support Fellow for Cochrane, an international not-for-profit organisation for independent health care research. She has over ten years of experience working in health services research and has published several systematic reviews on topics ranging from pregnancy to urinary incontinence to obesity. Fiona explains what a systematic review is, how we involve the public in our work, how our plain language summaries makes our evidence accessible, and the importance of our knowledge transfer and translation work. 

Episode 3 - How can we assess scientific information?

In this episode Eleanna Asvestari & Katja Kaurinkoski discuss with Jack Nunn the importance of making science accessible and how to assess critically all the information around us. Jack  is the founder and Director of the non-for-profit education organisation Science for All, and co-creator of ‘Standardised Data on Initiatives (STARDIT), a PhD researcher at the Department of Public Health at La Trobe University,  recently appointed member of the Cochrane Consumer Network Executive and part of  Cochrane's Advocacy Advisory group.

Learn more about the Science Basement podcast by following them on Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. 

Tuesday, August 15, 2023
Muriah Umoquit

Cochrane community participates in a virtual walk to raise money for Anne Anderson Award

3 years 1 month ago

The global Cochrane community are walking and raising money for the annual Anne Anderson Award, which is given to a Cochrane member who has contributed meaningfully to the promotion of women as leaders and contributors to the organization.

Who is Anne Anderson?
Anne Anderson was a contributor to the stream of thinking and effort that gave birth to evidence-based health care. A clinically qualified reproductive physiologist, Anne had an active interest in women’s health, co-editing the first edition of Women’s Problems in General Practice with Ann McPherson and contributed to Effectiveness and Satisfaction in Antenatal Care (1982), edited by Murray Enkin and Iain Chalmers. She was discussing with Marc Keirse and Iain Chalmers the possibility of co-editing a companion volume on elective birth, however her premature death from breast cancer in 1983 ended her involvement. Anne Anderson was 46 years old when she died. Iain Chalmers, Murray Enkin and Marc Keirse went on to publish Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth (ECPC) in 1989, dedicating the book in part to Anne. ECPC, through its systematic approach to assessing the research literature, is widely acknowledged to have led to development of Cochrane. 

What is the Cochrane Anne Anderson Award?
In the footsteps of Anne Anderson, many outstanding women continue to contribute and inspire other women to improve health knowledge for the good of their communities. Often these women are quiet achievers who might otherwise not be recognized. The goal of the Anne Anderson Award is to recognize and stimulate individuals contributing to the enhancement of women’s visibility and participation in the Cochrane leadership. The award is given to a Cochrane member who has contributed meaningfully to the promotion of women as leaders and contributors to the organization. 

The Anne Anderson Award winner receives a plaque from Cochrane honouring her contributions, as well as a cash award. The recipient designates the cash award to assist a woman from a low-resource setting with Cochrane activities.

What's the Anne Anderson Walk?
The Cochrane Colloquium, our annual flagship event, brings together the world’s most influential health researchers, scientists, academics, opinion leaders, clinicians, and patients to promote evidence-informed decision-making. It is here that the award is given out and the fundraising walk is held. The annual Anne Anderson Walk is a cherished annual social event, where attendees explore the Colloquium host-city by foot with a guide. Donations by participants are made to next year's Anne Anderson Award. 

Given current COVID-19 circumstances, Cochrane community's will be not be gathering in 2022 for a Colloquium. However, we are walking  together virtually and sharing pictures of our walks.

How can I participate?
All Cochrane Members and Supporters are welcome to participate in this virtual walk and fundraising effort! 

Thursday, February 10, 2022
Muriah Umoquit

Cochrane International Mobility

3 years 5 months ago

Getting involved in Cochrane’s work means becoming part of a global community. Connect with Cochrane Groups across the world through the Cochrane International Mobility programme!

The Cochrane International Mobility programme builds on previous successful student exchanges involving Cochrane Centres around the world. A broader initiative involving multiple Cochrane Groups has  been launched by Cochrane People Services Department.

Successful applicants will complete a placement in a host Group, learning more about the production, use and knowledge translation of Cochrane reviews.

Gain skills and experience

Arrangements are flexible and placements can vary in length, depending on the project plan. Placements are typically self-funded. Participants completing postgraduate study have benefitted from university funding, and some Groups can offer work space or accommodation. Training and mentoring support is offered in different areas, specific to Groups' expertise.

Learn from each other

Cochrane International Mobility offers opportunities for learning and training not only for participants but also for host staff. Cochrane Croatia welcomed a student intern as part of the fledgling programme.

“I’m very grateful to Cochrane Croatia for hosting me and for this wonderful experience, and I’m sure I’ll be using all the skills I learned as I continue on in my academic career,” said Sarah Tanveer, Cochrane International Mobility participant, Summer 2019.

Tina Poklepović Peričić, Co-director, Cochrane Croatia added, “This was an encouraging experience for us all, and spending time with Sarah, exchanging experiences, teaching and working with her was a true refreshment to our Centre.”

Apply now

Find out more about the programme on Cochrane Training or search for opportunities on Cochrane Engage.

Read profiles of participants

 

 

Monday, November 6, 2023
Muriah Umoquit
Checked
16 hours 15 minutes ago
Subscribe to Cochrane News feed