The Cochrane Collaboration review prioritization projects show that a variety of approaches successfully identify high-priority topics

Bero, Lisa; Binder, Lucie

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.03.015

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[7] Nevertheless, a wide variety of approaches for prioritising systematic review topics have been successful both within Cochrane and in other contexts, and no single approach is preferred. [15,16]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cochrane acute respiratory infections group's stakeholder engagement project identified systematic review priority areas

Scott

Clark

Dooley

et al. 2018

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cochrane acute respiratory infections group's stakeholder engagement project identified systematic review priority areas

Scott

Clark

Dooley

et al. 2018

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New innovations that help address this challenge include overviews of reviews [6], priority-setting processes [7,8], collaborating with and responding to the needs of stakeholder organizations [4] and developing and implementing policies that guide decisions about which new titles to register and for managing reviews that are within the scope of more than one review group [9]. New databases such as PDQ-Evidence (http://www.pdq-evidence.org) and Epistemonikos (http://www.epistemonikos.org) make it possible to quickly and easily identify related systematic reviews and see where there are gaps and overlap.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Registering protocols can also help to reduce bias in reviews [7]. Other innovations to address the risk of bias include developing and implementing a clear policy regarding declarations of interest and commercial sponsorship [11] and a tool for systematically assessing and reporting risks of bias in included studies [12].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Helping people make well-informed decisions about health care: old and new challenges to achieving the aim of the Cochrane Collaboration

Oxman

2013

Syst Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the Cochrane Collaboration is to help people make well-informed decisions about health care by preparing, maintaining and promoting the accessibility of systematic reviews of the effects of health care interventions. This aim is as relevant now as it was 20 years ago, when the Cochrane Collaboration was established. Substantial progress has been made toward addressing challenges to achieving the Collaboration’s aim. At the same time, a huge amount of work remains to be done. Current challenges include improving the quality of reviews, methodological challenges, meeting the needs of contributors and users and taking on new challenges while staying focused on the Collaboration’s aim. Radical thinking and substantial change may be needed to identify and implement pragmatic strategies to ensure that reviews are up-to-date and informative. Methodological challenges include the development and application of better methods for addressing explanatory factors, incorporating non-randomized evidence and making comparisons across multiple interventions. Innovations in editorial processes and strategies to meet the needs of low- and middle-income countries and diverse users of Cochrane reviews are needed. Finally, although it is important to consider broadening the aims of the Collaboration to include types of questions other than the effects of interventions and types of products other than the Cochrane Library, we should not lose sight of the aim of the Cochrane Collaboration. Addressing that aim is still a major challenge that requires the collaboration of thousands of people around the world and continuing improvements in the methods used to achieve that aim.

show abstract

“…Many Cochrane groups have processes by which they attempt to prioritise research topics, which may involve consultation with expert professionals, patients, advocates, and the public [3–5]. There is a growing body of literature exploring patient and public involvement in research [6–8], including scoping reviews [9, 10] and reports describing patient and public involvement in research priority setting for respiratory conditions [11, 12] and more specifically asthma [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Asthma can take over your life but having the right support makes that easier to deal with.” Informing research priorities by exploring the barriers and facilitators to asthma control: a qualitative analysis of survey data

Normansell

Welsh

2015

asthma res and pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundInvolving patients and the public in research prioritisation is important. Cochrane Airways works with authors to produce systematic reviews of evidence related to chronic airways disease. Cochrane Airways has undertaken activities to identify research priorities, including workshops with stakeholders and consultation with experts. We present the findings of an online survey, designed to align our work with the priorities of people affected by asthma.MethodsWe promoted a survey comprising open-ended questions via social media to people affected by asthma. We compiled the free-text responses and conducted an exploratory thematic analysis to identify important barriers and facilitators to asthma control. We triangulated findings with other research prioritisation activities to produce new review questions.ResultsWe received 57 survey responses. Eight main themes emerged, most encompassing both facilitators and barriers: attitudes and knowledge; financial costs; environmental factors and triggers; healthcare systems; lifestyle factors; medication; self-care; and support. Barriers were more frequently mentioned than facilitators and many related to healthcare systems.ConclusionsThese findings offer valuable insights into the challenges faced by individuals affected by asthma in the UK, and possibly further afield. We developed a list of priority reviews based on what was said by people in this survey and at a workshop. This demonstrates the real impact that people affected by asthma have on the research agenda of Cochrane Airways. Over the next 2–3 years we will produce reviews that address some of these questions hopefully leading to health benefits.

show abstract

The Cochrane Collaboration review prioritization projects show that a variety of approaches successfully identify high-priority topics

Cited by 14 publications

References 6 publications

Cochrane acute respiratory infections group's stakeholder engagement project identified systematic review priority areas

Cochrane acute respiratory infections group's stakeholder engagement project identified systematic review priority areas

Helping people make well-informed decisions about health care: old and new challenges to achieving the aim of the Cochrane Collaboration

“Asthma can take over your life but having the right support makes that easier to deal with.” Informing research priorities by exploring the barriers and facilitators to asthma control: a qualitative analysis of survey data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About