Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

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

Authors: Tari Turner, Sally Green, David Tovey, Steve McDonald, Karla Soares-Weiser, Charlotte Pestridge, Julian Elliott, on behalf of the Project Transform Team, IKMD developers

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

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.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Institute of Medicine. Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. Washington (D.C.): National Academies Press; 2011. Institute of Medicine. Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. Washington (D.C.): National Academies Press; 2011.
2.
go back to reference Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):1–17.CrossRef Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):1–17.CrossRef
3.
4.
go back to reference Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147(4):224–33.CrossRefPubMed Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147(4):224–33.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Sampson M, Tricco AC, Catala-Lopez F, Li L, Reid EK, Sarkis-Onofre R, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):e1002028.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Sampson M, Tricco AC, Catala-Lopez F, Li L, Reid EK, Sarkis-Onofre R, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):e1002028.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Elliott J, Turner T, Clavisi O, Thomas J, Higgins J, Mavergames C, et al. Living systematic reviews: an emerging opportunity to narrow the evidence-practice gap. PLoS Med. 2014;11(2):e1001603.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Elliott J, Turner T, Clavisi O, Thomas J, Higgins J, Mavergames C, et al. Living systematic reviews: an emerging opportunity to narrow the evidence-practice gap. PLoS Med. 2014;11(2):e1001603.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
Authors
Tari Turner
Sally Green
David Tovey
Steve McDonald
Karla Soares-Weiser
Charlotte Pestridge
Julian Elliott
on behalf of the Project Transform Team
IKMD developers
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0542-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Systematic Reviews 1/2017 Go to the issue