Guide for Developing a Cochrane Protocol - Cochrane Public Health ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

you in developing the protocol. A broad acknowledgement of the CPHG team is quite adequate if you wish to acknowledge the group. Contributions of authors Identify who has or will perform each of the following tasks (authors’ initials only): Draft the protocol Study selection Extract data from studies Enter data into RevMan Carry out the analysis Interpret the analysis Draft the final review Disagreement resolution Update the review Potential conflict of interest You should report any conflict of interest of any of the authors, which may influence their judgments in conducting the review, at protocol stage (refer to the summary of the Collaboration’s policy on conflicts of interest in Chapter 2 (Section 2.6) of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions for more information). This will include any present or past affiliations or other involvement in any organisation or entity with an interest in the review that might lead to a real or perceived conflict of interest. Areas of uncertainty should always be discussed with the CPHG. Situations that might be perceived by others as being capable of influencing a review author’s judgements include personal, political, academic and other possible conflicts, as well as financial conflicts. Authors must state if they have been involved in a study that may be included in the review. This section should reflect the information contained in authors’ ‘Declarations of interest statement’ within the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest Forms. You can access these forms from within your Revman file by clicking File -> Reports -> Declaration of Interest (you will receive a reminder from the editorial office to fill out electronically during the course of completing your protocol if you have not done so already). If there are no known conflicts of interest, this should be stated explicitly, for example, by writing ‘None known’. References - Other references Additional references References cited in the text should be listed here. Other reference categories (such as Included Studies) are generally not used in a protocol, but will be used in the completed review. References are referred to throughout the review using a Reference ID, usually comprising the first author’s surname and year of publication (e.g. Smith 2001), and all references must be linked Last updated: 24 November 2011 - 18 -
from the text of the protocol using this ID. You can enter the references individually, or import them from reference management software. Instructions on entering, importing and linked references are available from the Help menu in RevMan. Please run the Citation wizard in Revman, to help identify other Cochrane reviews of potential relevance to your review, to cite where appropriate in the protocol (and review thereafter). Other published versions of the review If the review has previously been published (e.g. in a journal or textbook) it should be listed here. Completing our Checklist Appendix 5 is a checklist we would like the author team to complete and send back when submitting their protocol for editorial review. This will help ensure you have followed our guidance and ensure speedier progress through this editorial stage. Last updated: 24 November 2011 - 19 -
Page 1 and 2: The Cochrane Public Health Group Gu
Page 3 and 4: Getting started Now that your title
Page 5 and 6: interventions for enhancing access
Page 7 and 8: design due to ethical or other reas
Page 9 and 10: Chapter 21 in Cochrane Handbook on
Page 11 and 12: published elsewhere. These addition
Page 13 and 14: If you are including ITS studies we
Page 15 and 16: Handbook which outlines the options
Page 17: outcomes (up to seven) that you pla
Page 21 and 22: Appendix 1 - Guidance for establish
Page 23 and 24: How will advice be managed and what
Page 25 and 26: The same editorial processes apply
Page 27 and 28: Was the study adequately protected
Page 29 and 30: Appendix 4 - Data Extraction and As
Page 31 and 32: Participants (Review authors insert
Page 33 and 34: What was the unit of randomisation?
Page 35 and 36: fidelity - process indicators) Prov
Page 37 and 38: Were PROGRESS categories analysed b
Page 39 and 40: eported Reanalysis required? (speci
Page 41 and 42: Mean value (with variance measure)
Page 43 and 44: Risk of bias assessment Please refe
Page 45 and 46: ITS: Was the shape of the intervent
Page 47 and 48: Results Comparison: Outcome: Subcat
Page 49 and 50: Are the interventions to be exclude
Page 51: Have you specified how you will det

Guide for Developing a Cochrane Protocol - Cochrane Public Health ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?