Document Detail

Ensuring relevance for Cochrane reviews: evaluating processes and methods for prioritizing topics for Cochrane reviews.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  22521577     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the presence and effectiveness of existing systems of prioritization for Cochrane review topics and to explore methods of improving those systems. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We surveyed groups of Cochrane review authors and recorded any evidence of their use of priority-setting processes or policies. To evaluate the effectiveness of the policies we encountered, we assessed them using two frameworks from the literature: "Accountability for Reasonableness" (1) and Sibbald's 2009 framework (2) for successful priority setting. We then held two workshops with the subject groups to discuss our findings and their implications. RESULTS: Of the 66 groups surveyed, 29 had a system in place to inform the selection or prioritization of topics for Cochrane reviews. Fifteen groups used a more comprehensive structured approach that eventually resulted in a list of ranked priority titles for authoring, updating, or disseminating Cochrane reviews. Most groups involved researchers, practitioners, and patients in their prioritization processes. CONCLUSION: Groups within The Cochrane Collaboration currently use a range of different priority-setting systems, some of which are more detailed than others. These differences often reflect the nature of The Cochrane Collaboration itself: given the topic breadth, history, and variety of international contexts present in the organization, a single unified system would not always be appropriate. All Cochrane entities, however, should have or develop strategic plans to improve the inclusiveness and transparency of their own prioritization processes, increase the number of finished prioritized reviews, and make more effective use of feedback from end users to increase the likelihood of producing reviews that have positive effects on health outcomes.
Mona Nasser; Vivian Welch; Peter Tugwell; Erin Ueffing; Jodie Doyle; Elizabeth Waters
Related Documents :
24521797 - Well-differentiated liposarcoma of the epiglottis.
17479877 - Pure red cell aplasia due to treatment with epoietin beta: first case report of prca fr...
24501507 - Minimal invasive endoscopic management of synchronous granular cell tumours in the colo...
24163547 - Sialoblastoma: a literature review from 1966-2011.
24366197 - Exenatide-induced eosinophilic sclerosing lipogranuloma at the injection site.
24331767 - Medical device adverse incident reporting in interventional radiology.
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2012-4-19
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of clinical epidemiology     Volume:  -     ISSN:  1878-5921     ISO Abbreviation:  -     Publication Date:  2012 Apr 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2012-4-23     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8801383     Medline TA:  J Clin Epidemiol     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  -     Citation Subset:  -    
Copyright Information:
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Peninsula Dental School, The John Bull Building, Tamar Science Park, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL6 8BU, UK.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Hearing, mobility, and pain predict mortality: a longitudinal population-based study.
Next Document:  Risk factors for tuberculosis among health care workers in South India: a nested case-control study.