Review proposals

Criteria for registration of new titles

We aim to produce only high priority, high impact reviews. In order for a new title to be accepted, we expect it to be supported by a strong case for registration, for example an urgent healthcare need or priority topic identified by policy-makers or guideline developers.

We expect the review team to have at least two authors and include the following expertise:

  • a high standard of English;
  • statistical skills;
  • methodological skills;
  • clinical knowledge/practice;
  • at least one experienced Cochrane author;
  • and, where possible, a multi-geographical team.

We expect authors to check the title they are proposing for potential overlap with existing reviews before submitting a title [by searching the Cochrane Library]. All authors must meet the terms in the Cochrane Commercial Sponsorship Policy: see here for more information. The review must not be dependent on external deadlines, such as a PhD thesis; we expect authors to adhere to Cochrane and PaPaS deadlines.

We will assess your title upon receipt of a Review Proposal Form (for intervention reviews) or an Overview Proposal Form (for overview reviews). The editorial team will:

  • assess the proposal against our scope (we may forward it to another group if it falls outside our scope);
  • check for potential overlap with existing reviews;
  • assess the skills of the author team;
  • clarify its priority as a topic;
  • check that all sections of the RPF have been adequately and competently completed.

If more than one team proposes doing the same review, PaPaS advocates collaboration. If this is not possible, any conflict is resolved through discussion.

See our Useful links (review proposals) and Step by step pages for more information about proposing a new review to PaPaS.