Cochrane News

Subscribe to Cochrane News feed
Updated: 4 hours 14 min ago

Featured Review: Paying for performance to improve the delivery of healthcare services in low- and middle-income countries

Wed, 04/28/2021 - 20:49

A recently published review from Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group looks at the effects of ‘pay for performance’ strategies on the delivery of healthcare services in low- and middle-income countries.

Karin Diaconu, first author of this review, notes, "There is growing interest in paying for performance as a strategy for aligning the work of health providers and healthcare organizations with public health goals. The volume of schemes implementing paying for performance has increased over the last decade and so has the number of studies on the effectiveness of these strategies in low- and middle-income countries.

This review brings this evidence together and asks how successful schemes are in improving health care and health. The review notes that paying for performance may have some positive effects: it may lead to increased uptake of some health services, better quality of care, and improve the availability of resources as well as improving autonomy of involved healthcare organisations."

Key messages

Pay for performance strategies may have both positive and negative effects on the health services they target. These strategies may also have positive effects on other health services that are not directly targeted and may have no unintended negative effects on these services. However, most of this evidence is of low certainty and we need more, well-conducted studies on this topic. 

What is ‘pay for performance’?

In a 'pay for performance' approach, people are given money or other rewards if they carry out a particular task or meet a particular target. This strategy is usually directed at health workers or healthcare organizations. The health workers or healthcare organizations are rewarded if they offer particular services or deliver care that is of a certain quality, or if their patients use particular services and achieve better health as a result.

Planners use these strategies to target specific health problems and services that need improvement. But it is also possible that pay for performance strategies have positive or negative effects, including on other services that are not specifically targeted. For instance, these strategies could lead health workers to improve the quality of the other services they deliver. But it could also lead them to avoid services that do not give extra payment. To find out more, the review authors assessed the effects of paying for performance on both targeted and untargeted services. This included looking for any unintended effects of the strategies. 

What are the main results of the review?

The review included 59 relevant studies. Most were from sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. Most of the pay for performance schemes in the studies were funded by national Ministries of Health, also with support of the World Bank. 

Forty-nine studies compared health facilities that used pay for performance strategies to health facilities who were doing business as usual. Seventeen studies compared health facilities that used pay for performance strategies to facilities that used other strategies. In most of these studies, health facilities using pay for performance strategies were compared to facilities who were given the same amount of funds but without a pay for performance element.

The effects of paying for performance compared to business as usual  

For health services that are specifically targeted, pay for performance strategies: 

  • may improve health outcomes, may improve service quality and probably increase the availability of health workers, medicines and well-functioning infrastructure and equipment
  • but may have both positive and negative effects on the delivery and use of health services 

For health services that are untargeted, pay for performance strategies: 

  • probably improve some health outcomes 
  • may improve the delivery, use and quality of some health services but may make little or no difference to others
  • may have few or no unintended effects 
  • we don’t know what the effects of pay for performance are on the availability of medicines and other resources because the evidence was of very low certainty

The effects of paying for performance compared to other strategies 

For health outcomes and services that are specifically targeted, pay for performance strategies: 

  • may improve service quality 
  • may make little or no difference to health outcomes
  • may have mixed effects on the delivery and use of health services and on the availability of equipment and medicines, including both positive and negative effects

For health outcomes and services that are untargeted, pay for performance strategies: 

  • may make little or no difference to health outcomes and to the delivery and use of health services
  • we don’t know what the effects of pay for performance are on service quality, on the availability of resources, and on unintended effects because the evidence was missing or of very low certainty

How up to date is this review?

The review authors included studies that had been published up to April 2018.

Wednesday, May 5, 2021

Featured review: Psychosocial interventions for adults who self‐harm

Fri, 04/23/2021 - 12:56
Friday, April 23, 2021

Cochrane seeks Community Support Officer

Thu, 04/22/2021 - 14:56

Location: Flexible location (remote working) – contract type dependent on location.
Specifications: Permanent employment if successful applicant based in UK, Germany or Denmark. Rolling annual contract (consultant) in other locations.
Hours: Full-time or minimum 25 hours per week (flexible working considered).
Salary: £30,000 (pro-rated for part-time).
Application Closing Date: Tuesday 11 May (Midnight GMT).

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

As Community Support Officer you will be joining Cochrane’s Community Support team. We are the first point of contact for the international Cochrane community. We provide a timely and coordinated support service to Cochrane editorial teams and review authors, and handle enquiries from members of the public about Cochrane’s work. We resolve queries covering a broad range of areas including Cochrane Account login, Cochrane review software, the editorial process, training and volunteering.

Community Support sits within the People Services department in Cochrane’s Central Executive. The department provides all people-focused services within Cochrane, including inclusive learning programmes, human resources, consumer engagement and a wide range of internal and public-facing support services.

We are looking for a self-motivated and highly organised individual who is able to work effectively and collaboratively as part of a remote team. Experience in providing user support to authors and editors using Editorial Manager would be an asset; however training can be provided. The successful candidate will also have:

  • Experience in providing technical support, including excellent communication skills.
  • Proactive and flexible approach to learning new systems to provide the best possible user support.
  • Excellent English-language communication skills (both verbal and written).
  • Experience in communicating technical content, tailoring standard communications to individual requirements, and working with people from a variety of cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
  • Attention to detail to ensure that community members always receive accurate information.
  • Experience in working collaboratively within complex organisations, including diverse and geographically-dispersed staff, collaborator and stakeholder groups across different time zones.
  • Self-motivated and results-oriented, with excellent organisation and time management skills, including the ability to work to deadlines as part of an interdependent team working remotely.
  • Openness to continuous professional development and training.

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 role 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: Tuesday 11 May (12 midnight GMT).
  • Interviews to be held on: Tuesday 25 May (times to be confirmed).
Thursday, April 22, 2021 Category: Jobs

Author interview: Stopping long-term antidepressants in people with depression or anxiety

Tue, 04/20/2021 - 22:13

Antidepressants are widely used for depression and anxiety. Guidelines recommend that an antidepressant should be continued for at least six months after people start to feel better, and for at least two years if they have had two or more periods of depression. Many people take antidepressants for much longer. Ellen Van Leeuwen and Mark Horowitz, authors of a recently published Cochrane review on approaches for discontinuing antidepressant use, answer some questions about the findings of the review. 

Tell us about this Cochrane Review, why did you think it was important to do it?

Ellen: The rise in long-term antidepressant use is a major concern. For example, in the UK, nearly half of people using antidepressant (8% of the total population, approximately 3.7 million people) have been taking them for more than two years. Antidepressants that, despite initially being appropriate, are not discontinued after the recommended duration can lead to unnecessary harm and costs.

Mark: Antidepressants can put people at risk of adverse events such as sleep disturbance, weight gain, sexual dysfunction and gastrointestinal bleeding, as well as feeling emotionally numb and what they described as feeling “addicted,” because they cannot easily stop the medication. This is because people’s brains physically adapt to antidepressants after long-term use (called physical dependence). They may also impair patients’ autonomy to deal with problems in their life without medication. Guidelines recommend that antidepressants should be taken up to 6 to 12 months after improvement and 2 years after improvement in people at risk for relapse.

Ellen: As a GP I see many patients struggling with coming off antidepressants that they have been taking long-term. However, I was surprised that there wasn’t a Cochrane review on discontinuing long-term antidepressants, so I started this review. We included all studies comparing approaches for discontinuation with continuation of antidepressants (or usual care) for people who are prescribed antidepressants for depression or anxiety for at least six months.

What can people learn about discontinuation from antidepressants from this evidence?

Ellen: Honestly, the evidence in this area is very problematic. It is not possible to make any firm conclusions about the effects and safety of the approaches for discontinuation studied to date. There were only a few studies with a focus on successful antidepressant discontinuation rate.

The main problem is that studies did not distinguish between symptoms of relapse of depression and symptoms of withdrawal after discontinuation. 

Mark: Yes, withdrawal symptoms can include insomnia, low mood, anxiety, changes to appetite, and these symptoms will be recorded on the depression scales used to detect relapse, so they might inflate the rate of relapse recorded in groups that stop antidepressants. 

Additionally, most tapering regimes were limited to four weeks or less, in contrast to NICE guidelines recommending tapering over four weeks or more. In fact, there is now increasing recognition that antidepressants might need to be tapered over months or longer than a year to very low doses for long-term users.

Ellen: For me, it was disappointing that the large group of people taking antidepressants in the community (i.e. those with only one or no prior episode of depression) have been under-researched. Most published studies focus on people with recurrent depression. Another finding was that we found very low certainty evidence that high intensity psychotherapy such as mindfulness based cognitive therapy (MB-CT) and  cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) may support people to come off antidepressants. But none of the studies included more scalable and accessible psychological approaches such as online support.

And what can people learn about continuation of long-term antidepressant use?

Ellen:  Based on the limitations we have mentioned, we cannot make any conclusion about this, as we were not confident in the evidence we found.  We certainly need more de-prescribing studies investigating the harms and the benefits of discontinuation before we can make any conclusion.

Mark:  Yes, it is very difficult to interpret existing studies that suggest continuation of antidepressants because they are based on discontinuation studies in which half of the patients are stopped – often abruptly or in a few days – compared to a group that continues their antidepressants. This means we can’t be sure whether the group who stopped got worse because of withdrawal symptoms or genuine relapse. To provide clearer evidence on this, future studies should distinguish carefully between relapse and withdrawal symptoms and follow emerging guidance to use taper schemes of many weeks or months (or longer for long-term users) down to very low doses before stopping. Such studies would give us a clearer idea of the ability of antidepressants to prevent relapse. 

Ellen: Additionally, there is an urgent need to include wider representation of patient populations. For example, those people with one or no prior episodes of depression, those with anxiety disorders, and older people including those who take multiple medications (polypharmacy) and those who are frail. Most antidepressants are prescribed by GPs. This review reinforces the call for more research in the primary care setting, particularly for people with low risk of relapse and those for whom there is uncertainty about the benefit of antidepressant treatment. 

What is the core message for clinician’s and patients?

Ellen: Overall there remain many uncertainties.  However, this review aids clinicians in openly discussing with their patient and with family/carers (as appropriate) the potential benefits and harms of continuing or discontinuing antidepressants including withdrawal.  

Mark: Doctors and patients should be aware that withdrawal symptoms from antidepressants are common and can be mistaken for relapse of the underlying condition. Although evidence found in this review is sparse, experiencing withdrawal symptoms is not a sign that the patient needs the antidepressant, but rather a sign that they might need to taper more gradually and down to lower doses before stopping. 

What will happen next? Are you planning an update or any subsequent reviews on a linked topic?

Ellen: Celebrating with my team that we made it!  No, I am currently working on a PhD of which the review is part of it which I want to defend in 2021.  However, I’m continuing further research in the field of long-term antidepressants. One of the recommendations of our review is a further review comparing different discontinuation strategies.  

Mark:  At the moment there are a few studies happening around the world looking at discontinuing antidepressants, such as the REDUCE trial in the UK, some including somewhat slower tapers than the studies found in this review, going down to lower doses, and so an update to this review may be necessary in the future. 

Thursday, April 22, 2021

A message from Cochrane’s Governing Board

Tue, 04/20/2021 - 18:14

Dear Community Colleagues, 

Last week, we informed you of the news that Mark Wilson was stepping down from his role as Chief Executive Officer (CEO) after eight years of outstanding service. 

Today, we want to provide you with an update of the Governing Board's plans during this transition period for organizational leadership. 

Our Editor in Chief, Karla Soares-Weiser, will be Cochrane’s Acting CEO; Toby Lasserson will be stepping up to Acting Editor in Chief; and Chris Champion, Head of People Services, will take on additional management responsibilities for finance, governance, and strategy. These arrangements will be effective until 24th May 2021.

Toby Lasserson, Karla Soares-Weiser, Chris Champion

We have begun the process of recruiting an interim CEO. More details on an appointment will follow shortly. In the meantime, the Board will work with Karla and the Senior Management Team to ensure continuity as the organization delivers its priorities for this year. 

We understand that this is a time of change for Cochrane and we are committed to providing regular updates and information regarding our plans. 

With our grateful thanks and best wishes, 

Catherine Marshall and Tracey Howe
Co-Chairs on behalf of Cochrane’s Governing Board

Wednesday, April 21, 2021

Featured Review: Probiotics to prevent gestational diabetes mellitus

Tue, 04/20/2021 - 09:59
Tuesday, April 20, 2021

Cochrane PaPaS seeks full-time Systematic Reviewer - remote

Mon, 04/19/2021 - 14:58

Closing date: 28 April 2021
Location: remote (home-working)

The Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care (Cochrane PaPaS) Review Group is looking for an experienced Systematic Reviewer to undertake high quality, priority Cochrane systematic reviews for publication in the Cochrane Library.

The focus of PaPaS is studies of interventions for acute pain, chronic pain, headache and migraine, palliative care for those with life-limiting disease or illness, and supportive care of patients and significant others living with serious illness.

The candidate will work with a multidisciplinary team to undertake new priority reviews, or update existing reviews, often as lead author and Contact Person. The candidate will be expected to adhere to editorial procedures and timelines, liaise with co-authors and members of the CRG, and respond to peer review and editorial feedback. The candidate must also ensure all output meets Cochrane standards and expectations, for example the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR).

The ideal applicant will be educated with a first degree in a related field (e.g. medical sciences, biology, statistics) and will have a higher degree relevant to the research area or equivalent qualifications. The candidate will have an understanding and working knowledge of scientific and medical terminology and clinical trials methodology, experience in writing Cochrane systematic reviews, and the ability to interpret and communicate complex information.

The PaPaS CRG is funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) in the United Kingdom as part of the Research and Development programme, and hosted by the Oxford University Hospitals (OUH) NHS Foundation Trust.

Monday, April 19, 2021 Category: Jobs

Job vacancies in evidence synthesis with Cochrane Infectious Diseases group - Liverpool, UK

Thu, 04/08/2021 - 15:43

Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine’s Centre for Evidence Synthesis in Global Health has led developments in systematic reviews in tropical medicine and international health. In the 1990s, staff contributed to setting up Cochrane, and established the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group (CIDG). This is now recognised as one of Cochrane’s premier groups, with over 150 Cochrane reviews and 600 authors, and is well-linked with the World Health Organization.

Two job positions are currently being advertised with the Centre (Research Assistant and Clinical Research Associate in evidence synthesis). A further position is advertised with the University of Liverpool (Research Assistant/Postdoctoral Research Associate in medical statistics).

For informal inquiries regarding the two LSTM posts, please contact:

Research Assistant 

Based in Liverpool, an exciting opportunity has arisen for a Research Assistant to join the team of 11 staff to contribute to public health and clinical Cochrane reviews relevant to COVID-19. CIDG work closely with the Central Cochrane Editorial Unit in prioritising and completing relevant reviews. We have published reviews in public health measures including quarantine, diagnostic tests, and treatments. We are currently working with a variety of teams worldwide on COVID-19 relevant reviews and review updates, including diagnostic COVID-19 reviews with the international team organised from the University of Birmingham.

The successful candidate will have a Master degree that includes training in interpreting quantitative data; ideally you will also hold a postgraduate qualification in epidemiology or related quantitative topic. You will have experience in biomedical or social science research in low and middle-income countries, and have the ability to critically appraise medical literature at postgraduate level. A PhD is desirable.

You need clear evidence of critical insight into priority policy questions in international health relevant to infectious diseases, and experience in diagnostic test research is desirable. If you have authored a Cochrane review, have experience of using GRADE, or have a track record in published research, it will be an added advantage to your application.

Clinical Research Associate

Based in Liverpool, an exciting opportunity has arisen for a Research Associate to join the team of 11 staff to contribute to the broad programme of research and development in READ-It. We are currently working on Cochrane effects reviews in COVID-19, malaria drug treatment, malaria vector control and TB and malaria diagnostics; and a variety of qualitive evidence synthesis reviews in neglected tropical diseases and TB. There are also methodological projects related to Cochrane review methods that there may be opportunities to be part of. We aim for a mixed portfolio to provide a broad exposure to evidence-informed science.

The successful candidate will have an MBBS and an appropriate postgraduate qualification. You will have experience and confidence in critically appraising medical literature at postgraduate level and demonstrate evidence of a critical insight into priority policy questions in international health in infectious diseases relevant to low- and middle-income countries. Excellent skills in writing in plain English are important to the post.

The post holder will demonstrate experience of working in a multi-disciplinary team with the ability to work collaboratively as well as independently. We want people who have an enthusiastic approach to work and possess excellent attention to detail. Strong communication, time and organisational skills are pivotal as you will be responsible for ensuring effective communication flow within the project team. If you have authored a Cochrane review, have experience of using GRADE, have a track record in published research or possess a PhD in a relevant field, it will be an added advantage to your application. You will also contribute to the postgraduate teaching programme in critical appraisal and evidence synthesis.

Research Assistant / Postdoctoral Research Associate

University of Liverpool - Department of Health Data Sciences

This is a post for a medical statistician with an interest in systematic reviews and network meta-analysis to support the work of the Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group and evidence synthesis research at the Department of Health Data Science.

You will have a Master’s degree in Statistics or a related field, an ability to manage quantitative data as well as advanced computing skills. Proven experience in the development and critical appraisal of indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis is required and you will be able to use statistical software packages. You must be organised, conscientious and able to work both independently and within a research team.

Thursday, April 8, 2021 Category: Jobs

World Health Day 2021: Building a fairer, healthier world

Tue, 04/06/2021 - 18:37

Wednesday 7 April marks World Health Day, a day organised by the World Health Organization (WHO) to highlight a particular global health issue. This year, it aims to spotlight health equity.

Health equity is the absence of avoidable and unfair differences in health. The COVID-19 pandemic and its uneven impacts worldwide has brought attention to long-standing inequities in living and working conditions which affect people’s health outcomes.

This World Health Day, WHO is calling on leaders to address these inequities, to monitor them, and to ensure people have access to quality health care.

Cochrane is committed to promoting the consideration of health equity in evidence synthesis and has been working on this in several ways.

Health equity in the Cochrane Handbook

The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions has a full chapter dedicated to incorporating health equity in evidence synthesis.

Health equity in methods

Equity has its own standard in the Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR), the overarching standards which guide the conduct and reporting of Cochrane Intervention Reviews. The Campbell and Cochrane Equity Methods Group is also developing an equity checklist.

Cochrane Interactive Learning health equity module

There is a module of the Cochrane Interactive Learning course on health equity in systematic reviews. In it, users can learn about health equity and how and when health equity can be incorporated in all steps of the systematic review process. The module also addresses how health equity should be considered in planning aspects of knowledge translation.

Cochrane Review Group Networks’ health equity priority setting

Cochrane Review Group Networks are currently piloting an approach to incorporating health equity considerations in priority setting for the update of reviews. Eve Tomlinson, Network Support Fellow for the Cochrane Cancer Network, presented an update on this project at last week’s monthly Join the Conversation webinar. Watch the recording below. 

Vaccine equity declaration

In March 2021, Cochrane also signed WHO’s Vaccine Equity Declaration, which calls for a more equitable distribution of vaccines for COVID-19.

Read more about World Health Day.

Wednesday, April 7, 2021

Exceptional global collaboration delivers the new PRISMA 2020 statement

Thu, 04/01/2021 - 17:01

Cochrane community contributes to update to the PRISMA statement. PRISMA is an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. PRISMA primarily focuses on the reporting of reviews evaluating the effects of interventions, but can also be used as a basis for reporting systematic reviews with objectives other than evaluating interventions (e.g. evaluating aetiology, prevalence, diagnosis or prognosis). 

A dedicated global team of methodologists, search specialists, biostatisticians and systematic reviewers have spent the last few years diligently updating PRISMA - the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. First published in 2009, PRISMA was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. 

While this may sound simple, it is anything but. Systematic reviews are complex, using an array of methods from the identification of studies through to the synthesis of results, and careful reporting is required so that users of the review (such as guideline developers, policy makers, healthcare providers and patients) are able to understand what was done and how the findings might apply to them.

The updated open-access PRISMA statement is available online and published in no less than five leading journals - including BMJPLOS MedicineJournal of Clinical EpidemiologySystematic Reviews and International Journal of Surgery. It represents a major global collaborative effort which was sustained throughout the many challenging months dominated by COVID-19 throughout 2020. The project had strong representation from Monash University's School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, with co-leads Matthew Page and Joanne McKenzie (and David Moher, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute) and contributors Sue Brennan and Steve McDonald. This representation reflects the calibre of systematic review expertise within the School - with specialisation in methods for bias, statistics, certainty of the evidence (GRADE) and searching.

PRISMA workshop participants, Cochrane Colloquium, Edinburgh 2018

‘This was such a rewarding experience thanks to the enthusiastic input, detailed deliberations and expert contributions from both our local team and fellow researchers around the world,’ lead author Matthew Page explains. ‘The updating process involved lengthy consultation and a comprehensive survey of systematic reviewers, journal editors and methodologists with experience with and interest in the use of the previous iterations of PRISMA.’

‘We obtained a lot of valuable feedback via our initial survey. In addition to answers to more straightforward multiple choice questions, we also collated over 100 pages worth of collective free text comments from respondents who felt really passionately about particular reporting elements, and specified what they thought should or shouldn’t be included in the updated guideline. We had this wealth of feedback to draw on and discuss at our two day workshop at the Cochrane Colloquium in Edinburgh back in 2018, which was fantastic. A healthy degree of consensus emerged from that, followed by much drafting, redrafting and careful considerations around the clarity of language used to update existing and outline new recommendations. This was followed up by piloting with authors to get their feedback and incorporate a final round of changes.’ 

Joanne McKenzie played a critical role throughout this process, co-facilitating the development meeting and processing the meeting notes, developing the updated guideline structure and overseeing the inclusion of guidance on new statistical developments that have been introduced in the decade since the original PRISMA statement was released. 

‘We know systematic reviews are essential for healthcare providers, policy makers, and other decision makers, who would otherwise be confronted by an overwhelming amount of research to guide their decisions,’ Joanne says. ‘We really wanted to make this a practical, accessible and contemporary checklist both for systematic reviewers and for the many different users who depend on them. As such, we included detailed information about why reporting of each item is recommended along with plenty of examples from published reviews.’ 

‘We’re hopeful that these kinds of changes and additions to PRISMA 2020 will encourage greater uptake of the guideline and lead to more transparent, complete and accurate reporting of systematic reviews around the globe. There are plenty of positives in that for everyone.’ 

In a study Matthew Page and colleagues conducted on Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews in PLOS Medicine back in 2016, around 29% of authors explicitly reported that they used the PRISMA Statement to guide either the conduct or reporting of their review, and all those who worked on this update are hopeful this number will continue to rise. 

‘Looking ahead, we’ll continue to work together to plan and design interventions and software to help with future implementation,’ Joanne concludes. ‘We’re keen to evaluate both the use and usability of PRISMA 2020 in the months and years to come, so while we’re excited about the launch today it’s definitely part of a bigger picture plan to support and encourage more accurate and complete reporting of systematic reviews now and into the future.’ 

Wednesday, April 7, 2021

Cochrane Australia vs. COVID-19: Supporting the national COVID-19 Taskforce

Thu, 04/01/2021 - 11:02

In March 2020, Cochrane Australia convened the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce - bringing together leading health researchers, experts and organisations from across the country.

Since then, over 240 members have worked around the clock to deliver living clinical guidelines and flowcharts for frontline health workers.  The guidelines are updated and published online every week, they feature 124 guideline recommendations and have reached more than 180,000 users worldwide.

To learn more about the work of Cochrane Australia and how the Taskforce is continuing to evolve, click here to read a short case story.

Thursday, April 1, 2021

Cochrane Austria launches joint trial transparency report

Tue, 03/30/2021 - 20:15

Cochrane Austria, together with TranspariMED and Transparency International Austria, has recently published a report on clinical trial transparency in Austria, which provides an update on figures released one year ago.

The report uses data from the EU Trials Tracker to summarise the clinical drug trial reporting rates of the 14 largest sponsors in Austria. Under EU rules, clinical trial sponsors must post summary results to the EU Clinical Trials Register within one year of a study ending, or six months for paediatric trials.

According to the new report, results have now been published for 37% of due clinical trials, compared to just 18%, as cited in 2020.

While this is impressive progress – with some institutions making significant efforts to publish their backlog of results – there is still more work to be done. 233 completed and overdue trials are still awaiting results on the EU registry, and half of the sponsors have made no progress at all.

Barbara Nussbaumer-Streit, co-director of Cochrane Austria, said: “The trend towards better reporting is welcome. However, we should not forget that two thirds of trial results are still missing. This can lead to delays in the development of new and effective therapies, and thereby harms patients.”

Gerald Gartlehner, co-director of Cochrane Austria, said: "Missing clinical trial results can lead to patients receiving ineffective therapies because doctors lack important information."

Cochrane supports clinical trial transparency. We rely on the availability of trial results to produce high quality and relevant systematic reviews. When trial results are left unpublished, it is impossible to make truly evidence-informed decisions about healthcare and people can be put at risk.

Tuesday, March 30, 2021

A day with... Statistics Methods Group – 11 May 2021

Mon, 03/29/2021 - 18:30

Register for the 'A day with... Statistics Methods Group’ which is taking place on 11 May 2021.

This is part of a series of virtual events from Cochrane Training for anyone interested in systematic review methodology and the work of Cochrane Methods Groups. Whether you are new to systematic review methodology or an advanced-level learner, these virtual events will be an opportunity for you to meet and learn from colleagues from different Methods Groups, with a variety of online events happening throughout the day.

This all-day event will highlight the Cochrane Statistics Methods Group and methods and issues around heterogeneity. There will be presentations from early career researchers and a virtual 'get-to-know-you' networking session. You can register for a session on the latest methodological developments, pose a challenging methods question for one of our experts, explore some of the free learning that is available, or take part in Twitter chats using #adaywithCochraneSMG. 

Monday, March 29, 2021

Celebrating Anne Anderson and Cochrane diversity with new designs: interview with artist Heather Tubwon

Fri, 03/26/2021 - 21:04

Interview with Heather Tubwon, the artist that created the new limited edition designs in the Cochrane store celebrating Anne Anderson and our diverse community.

The global Cochrane community are participating in a virtual walk 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. To mark this occasion, we have added limited editions designs to the Cochrane store, with sales going to the Anne Anderson Award.  We caught up with the artist, Heather Tubwon, to learn more about her and new designs. 

Hi Heather! Our Cochrane Community always finds it interesting to learn the backstory to things and learn more about people. Could you tell us a bit more about yourself? 
Sure! I'm from the Midwest in the United States. I have a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in Illustration from the Minneapolis College of Art and Design. I have a background in Graphic Design, Illustration, and Textile/Surface Design. Some of my favorite jobs have included creating artwork for toys, children’s clothes, and stationery products  - and now for Cochrane!

Was art something you always were interested in?
Yes - When I was around 10, my classmates noticed some of my drawings and told me I was really good at it. That’s when I first considered art as a career. However, life had a lot of twists and turns for me, and I ended up working in the airline industry. One of my tasks in that role was writing, creating diagrams, and laying out an FAA approved manual to teach Flight Operations personnel new software. I really enjoyed this work, and thought I might enjoy being a Graphic Designer professionally. After taking some design classes in art school, I realized my real passion was illustration.

These designs were a bit different for us. They are centered around our Cochrane Community event, the Anne Anderson Walk. While we knew we wanted to incorporate our brand colours, we were looking for something  playful. How would you describe your style?
I would describe my style as colorful, whimsical, and fun. I feel like I create my best work when I’m having fun, and I hope this joy comes across in my work. If I can make someone smile through my work, then I feel like I have accomplished my goal.

We launched the Anne Anderson Walk on International Woman's Day and are highlighting all the virtual walk pictures on a global map. Diversity is a core value to the Cochrane Community and one of our strengths too - so  we really wanted celebrate that. Why do you think showing diversity is important in visual arts? 
I think that showing diversity is important in visual arts. I am multiracial myself - my primarily ethnically is Ashkenazi Jewish and Black. There have been many times where I was not able to see other people that looked like me in media, especially as a child. Growing up, my local library only had two books showing biracial or multiracial families. This made me feel othered, or like I was different from everyone else. That’s why I always strive to show diversity in my own work. Cochrane shows diversity not only in it's member make-up but also in it's methods and the contributions people make - I created the design to represent that. 

 Anne Anderson is a beloved person in the Cochrane Community. Can you tell us a bit about working on that artwork?
After reading about Anne Anderson, I was impressed with all that she was able to accomplish in her short life. She seemed like a very ambitious and driven woman, someone who was a role model for many. I was honored to be asked to create a portrait of her. In creating her portrait, I wanted to be respectful and honor her legacy, while at the same time creating a work that was playful and engaging. 


Tuesday, April 6, 2021

Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group dispels myths on podcast

Fri, 03/26/2021 - 20:30

Latest episode of the Dementia Researcher podcast chats about the work of Cochrane, how we support evidence-informed decision making in healthcare, our work on undertaking systematic reviews, and how you could become involved.

The Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group create reviews and methods guidance on all aspects of dementia, delirium and other cognitive disorders.  Recent outputs have included a focus on diagnosis of dementia, which have been curated in to a Cochrane Library Special Collection,  and reviews on prognosis and complex interventions.

The group Coordinating Editors are Dr Jenny McCleery and Dr Terry Quinn and they recently spoke with Dr Anna Volkmer and Adam Smith on the Dementia Researcher podcast.  This biweekly podcast bring together panels of early career researchers and other dementia experts to discuss their research and career topics to support other early career researchers. The podcast covers research investigating Alzheimer's and other dementias, exploring prevention, diagnosis, treatments, care and how they're working to better understand the disease and the brain. For this session of the podcast they chatted about the work of Cochrane, how we support evidence-informed decision making in healthcare, our work on undertaking systematic reviews, and how you could become involved.

Terry (@DrTerryQuinn) is Senior Lecturer and Honorary Consultant in University of Glasgow. In addition to his Cochrane role,  he works with the NIHR Complex Reviews Support Unit assisting author teams with evidence synthesis methods. Terry is passionate about increasing research capacity and supporting early career researchers and he hopes that the podcast will inspire enthusiastic researchers to get involved with Cochrane.

Jenny is a Consultant Psychiatrist in Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust. Her work has involved older adults with dementia and their families for 25 years and her enthusiasm for Cochrane is driven by a wish to help provide accurate and accessible answers to the clinical questions important to her patients and colleagues.


Monday, June 7, 2021

Lund University working paper illustrates how to integrate Cochrane Interactive Learning to deliver relevant evidence-based medicine learning objectives

Thu, 03/25/2021 - 11:30

In the Medical Degree Program at Lund University, Sweden, a new Scientific Scholarship theme has been implemented, including evidence-based medicine (EBM), as the application of scientific scholarship in EBM is a core aspect of medical education. Throughout the program, scientific scholarship and EBM are supported by multifaceted learning activities and structured assessment, ensuring that students work continuously and iteratively with these concepts. The theme also makes use of e-learning for written assignments and of Cochrane Interactive Learning modules together with locally developed e-lectures.

Lead author, Maria Björklund, Librarian at the Faculty of Medicine, reported “the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules cover the process of how to conduct a systematic review, from formulating a question to finding, assessing and summarising evidence from studies. Each module contains videos, quizzes and exercises and an assessment that generates a certificate. Students upload their certificates to the university’s learning management system as part of the formal course assessment. The modules’ contents are of high quality, the level is challenging and requires students to be engaged. The assessment tasks and modules can be revisited, which gives opportunity for repetition. The methodology of conducting a systematic review contains many elements that are necessary to master also for other evidence-based work relevant to students in their role as future physicians, such as clinical guideline development. Therefore, the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules were considered highly relevant to integrate in the Scientific Scholarship theme.”

She concluded, “our implementation of the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules where they match the learning objectives is successful, in line with previous findings. Together with locally developed e-lectures and specialized library support students get additional context and examples. Collaboration with an evidence expert organization, such as Cochrane, give students authentic and international context together with an understanding of the importance of systematic reviews in EBM. This has led to a significant increase in the number of students performing a systematic review as their master thesis.”

Tips from Lund University

  • To help embedding the Cochrane interactive Learning modules in courses it’s good if the learning outcomes of the course match the Cochrane module.
  • It will also help if you plan to use the Cochrane modules as part of the  overall course assessment.
  • If needed, the modules can be studied and used over several semesters.
  • If students are new to systematic reviews, it’s good to give them context, perhaps with other locally developed learning activities explaining the methodology of systematic reviews.
  • Invite people to collaborate in using Cochrane Interactive Learning - librarians, teachers, clinicians - to help students get many examples and situations where the Cochrane modules can be used.

Chris Watts, Cochrane’s Learning Manager added “It’s fantastic to see our Cochrane Interactive Learning modules used in this way. We have designed the suite of modules so that, as well as being used by individuals as standalone, self-directed learning, they can also be adopted by trainers to use as part of blended learning approaches. The modular design and clear learning outcomes for the modules helps trainers to select and integrate Cochrane Interactive Learning into their learning programmes. The work at Lund is an excellent example of that, and we’re keen to encourage others to do the same or share their experiences of doing so with us.”

Contact the Learning Team about using the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules as part of your blended learning training, via

Learning progression from basic scientific scholarship to evidence-based medicine: a multimodal approach. Björklund, Maria; Perez, Maria Thereza; Regnér, Sara; Garwicz, Martin. Lund: Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, 2020. Research output : Working paper

Friday, March 26, 2021

Addictive Brain's videocast features US Senior Officer

Wed, 03/24/2021 - 19:11

Watch Cochrane US Senior Officer, Tiffany Duque, as the featured guest on the Addictive Brain videocast. Tiffany spoke to  Dr. Chinmaya  Sadangi for the session called "Interview with a Scientist." 

The Addictive Brain is an online community aiming at bridging the gap between science and the world in general. Their audience is mostly non-scientists and students, so they communicate in simple language and avoid scientific jargons - making science and health evidence accessible! 

They chatted about health evidence synthesis, it's importance and use, the "infodemic" we are currently facing, and how anyone can get involved in Cochrane.  You'll learn a lot in 30 minutes!

Tiffany mentions lots of resources available to those new to Cochrane; here are some of the key links:

Wednesday, March 24, 2021

Cochrane International Mobility - Vanessa Young

Mon, 03/22/2021 - 16:09

Cochrane is made up of 11,000 members and over 67,000 supporters come from more than 130 countries, worldwide. Our volunteers and contributors are researchers, health professionals, patients, carers, people passionate about improving health outcomes for everyone, everywhere.

Getting involved in Cochrane’s work means becoming part of a global community. The Cochrane International Mobility programme connects successful applicants with a placement in a host Cochrane Group, learning more about the production, use, and knowledge translation of Cochrane reviews. The prgramme offers opportunities for learning and training not only for participants but also for host staff.

In this series, we profile those that have participated in the Cochrane International Mobility Program and learn more about their experiences.

Name: Vanessa Young
Cochrane Rehabilitation, Italy

How did you first learn about Cochrane?
I started referring to Cochrane as an undergraduate student to find reputable reviews for my research courses. Cochrane facilitated finding articles pertaining to the scope of my work as well as honing my critical thinking in a scientific but well-organized fashion that allowed me to seek out answers to the questions that I had. Most recently, I became attracted to their “plain language” section that I embraced in order to better develop my written and verbal communication skills with patients or people not familiar with the subject of neuropsychology.

What was your experience with Cochrane International Mobility?
My experience at Cochrane Rehabilitation was enlightening both personally and professionally. Highly regarded professionals like Dr. Chiara Arienti were willing to extend their trust, faith and confidence in my work despite navigating the complexities of a systematic review and the protocol process for the first time in a collaborative environment. It was a wonderful way to learn and grow as part of a distinguished team that inspired and motivated me through their assistance.

What are you doing now in relation to your Cochrane International Mobility Experience?
Currently, we’ve submitted the protocol for the PTSD interventions as they apply to the clinical rehabilitation process. We are in process of beginning the article screening and data extraction process culminating in the potential for publication and the distinct career building privilege to be listed as a co-author of the project.
Do you have any words of advice to anyone considering a Cochrane International Mobility Experience?
If you are a hardworking, eager to learn young researcher just beginning to build the knowledge, skills and experience base required to thrive, consider Cochrane. Cochrane provides unique accessibility and many windows of opportunity to interact with senior researchers on meaningful projects. The senior professionals patiently mentor their younger colleagues as worthy contributors deserving of their role on the team and provide priceless counsel. The main lesson is that science is a collaborative process requiring invested contributors and novel ideas that are not afraid to challenge the status quo.

Monday, March 22, 2021

Medical student relay delivers a new Cochrane review & plenty of practical knowledge

Thu, 03/18/2021 - 16:09

Mindfulness has been growing in popularity across the globe over the past decade and is increasingly the subject of scientific research into the benefits it may deliver. In 2020, six students from Melbourne’s Monash University sought to better understand if and how mindfulness practice could help fellow medical students and junior doctors deal with the significant stresses and demands of their studies and chosen profession.

Alice Jiang, Gizem Hasimoglu, Jonathan Shachar, Qiao Xin Tee, Darren Trinh and Praba Sekhar signed up for the formidable task of completing a Cochrane systematic review of the latest evidence as part of the School of Public Health and Preventative Medicine’s Scholarly Intensive Placement (SIP) program.  Cochrane Australia is based at Monash within the School of Public Health, giving the eager students direct access to all the right tools, support and supervisors.

‘We had all briefly looked at mindfulness during medical school,’ Praba explains. ‘So it was really interesting to be involved in a project that evaluated and assessed the effectiveness of mindfulness in a target population that I’m actually a part of. We know both from our first-hand experiences as students and from the extensive research that we conducted, that levels of psychological distress, depression and anxiety are consistently higher in medical students. Studies here in Australia found 48% of medical students to be psychologically distressed - that’s more than four times that of peers the same age. Junior doctors work longer hours (averaging 50 hours a week), and students report high expectations, competitiveness, frequent exams, heavy study loads and many time pressures as key contributing factors. Given mindfulness is now widely considered for beneficial and therapeutic uses, exploring how it might help stressed-out students and doctors as part of this placement program made a lot of sense.’

Supervised by Cochrane Australia’s Dr Tari Turner and Professor Sally Green, the students completed the SIP program and their Cochrane review using a unique relay-style approach - exploring both the evidence on mindfulness, and the challenges and rewards of conducting a systematic review.

‘All of our SIP participants proved themselves to be incredibly clever, creative and committed,’ Tari says. ‘Each student worked intensely for short periods of between six to nine weeks and passed the baton to the next person to progress the review. Collectively they covered everything from developing a protocol, to searching and selecting studies, collecting and analysing data, and understanding risk of bias, health economics and equity in systematic reviews. The result of this extraordinary effort is tangible. Mindfulness-based psychological interventions for improving mental well-being in medical students and junior doctors is now with Cochrane for peer-review and is expected to be published later this year. Sally and I are really impressed with and proud of all of our SIP students’ individual and collaborative achievements.’

The consensus among participants is similarly positive. ‘My work with Cochrane Australia gave me a wider appreciation for the time-intensive nature and thoroughness needed to carry out a Cochrane Systematic Review,’ Praba says. ‘I particularly enjoyed learning about specific technical skills required. Performing thorough data extraction and risk of bias was an invaluable experience. The skills I gained have enhanced my ability to make clinical judgement as a medical practitioner, and increased my ability to understand, scrutinise and evaluate medical advice and evidence.’

Fellow participant Darren Trinh couldn’t agree more and found the SIP program changed his perspective on many aspects of both research and researchers. ‘I had an image in my head that presented researchers as very competitive, very busy, scary people - probably akin to an evil lab scientist who had to compete for grants to put food on their table with no time for medical students who are thrust upon them,’ he quips. ‘Fortunately, this was the complete opposite of my experience and I thoroughly enjoyed interacting with researchers at Cochrane and internationally.’

‘The collaboration during the systematic review process offered an amazing insight that has changed the way I see systematic reviews. So many people work together, sharing an incredible amount of energy, resources and skill to create this single piece of evidence. It’s now clear to me why systematic reviews are seen as the peak of the evidence pyramid.’

Thursday, March 18, 2021