Welcome to Cochrane Methods
- Methodology Review just published: Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions
- “From concepts to evidence synthesis: Towards a research agenda for methods of public health systematic reviews”. A well received and successful symposium attended by over 100 delegates addressed issues of conducting public health reviews that required a range of methods to address broader context specific questions - Who, What and Why? Presenters addressed approaches for public health reviews that involve the "complicated complex and the complex complex (James Thomas, EPPI Centre, UK). Slide sets will be made available shortly on this site.
- Methods Board agree to focus next year's symposium on the communication and understanding of "Evidence-based methods".
- This year's Cochrane Methods is now available.Look out for this Cochrane Methods Library supplement in your Colloquium packs. Hardcopies will be sent out. Contact Maria Burgess firstname.lastname@example.org if you would like a copy.
Including non-randomized studies of interventions in a Cochrane Systematic Review and applying a Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Non-Randomized Studies (ACROBAT-NRS). This year’s Methods Training event in December in Paris is now FULLY BOOKED
Cochrane funded a two-day workshop on updating systematic reviews in June at McMaster University to produce recommendations, an action plan going forward, enable development of guidance and monitoring performance indicators for CRGs, and explore statistical and technological developments that could facilitate updating. The workshop idneitified the challenges, when and whether to update. When proceeding, how to update exploring different approaches and the use of technology to create efficiencies. Some other considerations were centralisation of updates, management of a review’s update status, incentivizing authors, and managing authorship of updates (new authors). Recommendations were made. Further information.
HEADLINES FROM THE METHODS GROUPS 2013-2014
- ADVERSE EFFECTS, EQUITY and INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPNAT DATA MGs are all contributing to reporting guidance (PRISMA).
- SCREENING AND DIAGNSOTIC TESTS, APPLICABILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS and the ECONOMICS MGs are all conducting full day workshops at the Colloquium. Economics are conducting a post Colloquium two day workshop on health economics on the 26th and 27th September. The other two workshops are now FULLY BOOKED.
- The PROSPECTIVE META-ANALYSIS MG convenors are active participants in the access to data debates giving high profile presentations to the Society for Clinical Trials, the National Library for Health, food and Drug Administration, Drug Information Association, BMJ, and the Medical Publishing Insights and Practices Initiative in New York. Davina Ghersi and Lisa Askie are on the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Advisory Group.
- The STATISTICAL MG are recommending new statistical methods for dealing with heterogeneity (e.g. various estimators of the heterogeneity variance, calculation of confidence interval for the heterogeneity variance and for the summary of effect). This new estimator (Paule and Mandel) will use the Knapp-Hartung method for obtaining confidence intervals and the summary of effect. These will be taken forward in the next major structural change in RevMan (online).
- The PROGNOSIS MG exemplar project progresses with the very recent publication of the first of three review protocols looking at prognostic factors for non-specific low back pain.
- The COMPARING MULTIPLE INTERVENTIONS MG has produced six guidance documents available on their website.
- The AGENDA AND PRIORITY SETTING MG are working with colleagues in both the Economics MG and the CEU on prioritisation approaches to updates and research priority setting exercises for CRGs.
- The BIAS MG and the NON-RANDOMISED STUDIES (NRS) MG have successfully developed an extension to the ‘Risk of bias tool’ for NRS, further development of the tool for nonstandard designs and the current tool for RCT’s progresses.
- The following MGs are currently involved in a range of research and development projects: PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOMES (summarising data in minimally important difference units), INFORMATION RETRIEVAL (cluster searching for SR’s of complex interventions, filters to identify research in LMIC’s, text mining techniques for the development of search filters), and finally QUALITATIVE AND IMPLEMENTATION (A tool to assess and data extract intervention complexity, contribution of trial qualitative ‘sibling’ studies compared with unrelated qualitative studies, and tool to ascertain the certainty of qualitative evidence).
Cochrane Methods is the virtual community, comprising a wide range of Cochrane groups and individuals, which exists to support the development and application of rigorous methodology to help ensure that all Cochrane systematic reviews meet the highest standards of quality.
Cochrane has been at the forefront of systematic review methodology for over 20 years. Cochrane systematic reviews attempt to collate all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a specific research question. They use transparent and reproducible research methods that are selected with a view to minimizing bias, thus providing more reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made. Cochrane currently publishes four types of reviews: systematic reviews of interventions; systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy; methodology reviews; and overviews.
Cochrane has 16 Methods Groups. Methods currently used in all Cochrane systematic reviews are: question formulation, information retrieval, data collection, bias assessment, statistics and meta-analysis and summary of findings. However, the methods used in systematic reviews are continually evolving and therefore the Cochrane Methods community now also supports a range of more specialised methods for: qualitative data synthesis, inclusion of evidence from non-randomised studies and economic evaluations, comparison of multiple interventions and agenda and priority setting (this list is not exhaustive – see About and Methods Groups for further details of methods currently supported).
Cochrane has also recently developed its own set of methodological standards for the conduct and reporting of Cochrane Reviews.
This site is intended for review authors, members of Methods Groups and Cochrane Review editorial teams as well as anyone interested in becoming more familiar with Cochrane methods. Information about methods-related activities and outputs within The Cochrane Collaboration will be provided here, including details of: methods innovations, developments, research, training and network events.
This site is under development (beta version) and will therefore be re-configured as new information is uploaded. Please provide feedback on the site.
Jackie Chandler, Methods Co-ordinator
|Sign the petition|