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: Lea Styrmisdóttir
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
CIM location: Cochrane Argentina

How did you first learn about Cochrane?
I first learned about Cochrane during my medical studies, the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules are an integrated part of the medical programme in Lund, Sweden.

What was your experience with Cochrane International Mobility?
I did a virtual exchange with Cochrane Argentina. I was part of writing a review on the effect of palivizumab, a monoclonal antibody, on respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in children. This was also the subject of my master thesis. Through CIM, I took part in different webinars and trainings, learning more about the Cochrane methodology. I had a great experience with CIM and I am glad I had the opportunity to work with such driven and talented people.

What are you doing now in relation to your Cochrane International Mobility experience?
I presented my master thesis in January earlier this year. The review about palivizumab for RSV infection was recently published. I have continued my work at Cochrane Sweden after CIM and I am now working on another review about systemic opioid regimens for postoperative pain in neonates together with two other Cochrane members that previously have been a part of the CIM programme. I am also hoping to do more work with Cochrane in the future.  

Do you have any words of advice to anyone considering a Cochrane International Mobility experience?
If you are interested in evidence-based medicine and want to get to know other researchers around the world, you should definitely take part in the CIM programme!

Monday, December 13, 2021

• Full-time, Part-time or  flexible arrangement
• Remote work with at least a 4 hour workday crossover with the AEST timezone
• AUD$60,000 - $80,000 full time base salary (or paid pro rata for parttime)

Launched in 2014, Covidence is a world leading SAAS platform that enables health and science research teams to rapidly synthesise and uncover actionable insights from the mountains of existing research in the world. Their mission is to dramatically improve lives by changing the way the world creates and uses knowledge. 

They are seeking to grow their global user engagement and support team with a Community Manager based in the Asia-Pacific region. To excel as a Community Manager, you will have excellent interpersonal skills, strong written and verbal communication skills, and be highly organised with proven ability to appropriately prioritise tasks and deliver on time in a busy environment. You will have demonstrated capacity to work independently and with others in a globally distributed team. And importantly, you’ll have proven ability working with online technologies and social media.

• Visit the Covidence website
• View the full job ad
• Apply for the position

 

Monday, December 6, 2021 Category: Jobs

Main area: Editorial; Evidence Based Medicine; Research
Grade: NHS AfC: Band 7
Contract: Fixed term: 9 months (The length of the contract is dependent on the start date; this is a maternity cover position, with the post-holder returning in October 2022)
Hours: Full time - 37.5 hours per week (Part-time hours considered)
Job ref: 321-CORP-MAED-B7
Site: Home-based
Salary: £40,057 - £45,839 Dependent on experience
Closing date: 04/01/2022 23:59
Interview date: 06/01/2022

We would like to invite applications for a Managing Editor (maternity cover) with the Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Review Group (PaPaS CRG). A Managing Editor is responsible for the day-to-day operational management of the CRG editorial base. The ideal applicant will be educated to degree level or above, with managerial, administrative, scientific or publishing experience or equivalent, along with excellent organisational and communication skills. Knowledge of scientific and medical terminology and evidence-based health care is desirable. Familiarity with clinical trials, systematic reviews, or Cochrane would be welcomed.

• This is a full-time remote (home-working) role until October 2022; part-time hours can be considered.
• The closing date is 06 January.
• For more information and how to apply, please visit this page

Monday, December 6, 2021

New online learning is now freely available about Consumer involvement in Cochrane as part of its Evidence Essentials modules.

Cochrane is delighted to announce the launch of a new module Consumer involvement in Cochrane as part of its  Cochrane Evidence Essentials free, online learning.

Written from the perspective of a healthcare consumer and co-created with patients and carers, this learning is for anyone interested in finding out about getting involved in Cochrane, as a patient, a carer, or member of the public (what Cochrane calls consumers).

Topics included in the module include a 'Welcome to Cochrane' section, a description of the different ways to contribute to systematic reviews evidence and to Cochrane, and how to sign-up to get involved. The learning is interactive, with quizzes, animations, and ways to check your knowledge.

This module is the latest in Cochrane’s “Evidence Essentials” that gives an introduction to Evidence Based Medicine, clinical trials, systematic reviews and how to use evidence when making decisions about your health. The modules have been visited over 35,000 times since their launch, and have now been translated into German and Russian, with other languages to follow.

Cochrane’s Consumer Engagement Officer, Richard Morley welcomed the launch of the latest module:

“Cochrane has a long history and commitment to involvement and engagement as an essential part of producing trusted evidence that can be used in making informed decisions and improving health. This latest module in the Evidence Essentials series has been co-designed and produced with consumers and puts into one exciting place all the information you might want to know in order to be a part of our growing global community.”

Lynn Laidlaw and Sally Crowe who facilitated the engagement process and wrote the initial content based on feedback from patients, carers and public, said: “We are very pleased that the final version launched today represents much of the discussion over two workshops.  We feel that this module is more attuned to people that may never have heard of Cochrane before, but are curious and potentially interested in getting involved in the production of Cochrane evidence”.

There are five interactive modules that make up Evidence Essentials: an introduction to Evidence Based Medicine, Randomized Controlled Trials, Introduction to systematic reviews, Understanding and using systematic reviews and the latest, Consumer involvement in Cochrane. The learning journey is led by Eleni, a fictional consumer.

• Modules are free to use, with a Cochrane account and are found at https://training.cochrane.org/essentials

Thursday, December 9, 2021

A World Health Assembly special session to discuss the development of a potential new global health treaty to support pandemic preparedness is taking place this week (29 November – 1 December).

The World Health Assembly is the decision-making body of the World Health Organization (WHO) and is attended by representatives of all Member States.

Our statement, which reiterates the reflections from the recent Cochrane Convenes meetings about the COVID-19 evidence response, is below:

Cochrane is a global advocate for evidence-informed health and health care. Our mission is to produce relevant and timely synthesized evidence.

Building and strengthening systems which are adequately prepared to produce and use reliable, relevant and timely evidence will be crucial to respond to future global health emergencies.

Cochrane recently hosted a convening of high-level stakeholders, co-sponsored by WHO, to reflect on the role of evidence in the COVID-19 pandemic and develop recommendations for future preparedness. The evidence response has been inequitable; our research methods, tools and processes have been pushed to their limits; and we have struggled to communicate uncertainties and gain trust.

Therefore, we urge Member States to ensure that any convention or instrument developed during this process prioritise the production, use and communication of evidence – and is accompanied by sustained investment in the systems and people who perform this vital role.

Our recommendations echo the WHO Evidence-informed Policy Network call for action, which we proudly support.

• Follow the meeting

Tuesday, November 30, 2021

Location: Flexible location (remote working) – contract type dependent on location.
Specifications: 1 Jan to 31 July 2022. Fixed-term contract if successful applicant based in UK, Germany or Denmark. Consultancy contract in other locations.
Hours: Part time 22.5 hours per week.
Salary: £30,000 per annum (pro-rated to part time).
Application Closing Date: Monday 13 December (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.  

The Cochrane Support team is the first point of contact for the international Cochrane community. We provide technical and user support to Cochrane editorial teams and review authors; and handle enquiries from members of the public about Cochrane’s work.

We pride ourselves on our timely and coordinated support service, covering a broad range of areas including Cochrane review-writing software, editorial processing and publication, Cochrane Account login, membership, training, and volunteering opportunities.

The team works closely with Cochrane’s Central Editorial Service and Editorial and Methods Department, as well as IT Services, to ensure accurate, consistent responses to queries on Cochrane technology, policies and methods.

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: Monday 13 December (12 midnight GMT)
• Interviews to be held on: w/c 20 December 2021 (times to be confirmed)
• If you have any questions or would like an informal chat about the role please contact Lorna via recruitment@cochrane.org
• Apply here

Monday, November 29, 2021 Category: Jobs

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: Raphaela Mayerhofer
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
CIM location: Cochrane Austria

How did you first learn about Cochrane?
Cochrane is a household name in my field, it must have been many years ago when I first heard about it

What was your experience with Cochrane International Mobility?
Even though my stay at Cochrane Austria was only four weeks long, I learned incredibly much. To make the most of my time, the team made sure I could join ongoing projects right away. I had the chance to participate in ongoing systematic reviews and rapid reviews, and work on projects assessing evidence synthesis methods. CIM gave me the opportunity to sharpen my skills and fueled my enthusiasm for evidence synthesis.

What are you doing now in relation to your Cochrane International Mobility experience?
I’m currently preparing a workshop to share what I learned with faculty members at my university.

Do you have any words of advice to anyone considering a Cochrane International Mobility experience?
Find a Cochrane Center that specializes in what interests you to make the most of it!

Wednesday, November 24, 2021

Specifications: Full Time (Permanent)
Salary: £85,000 per annum
Location: Flexible
Application Closing Date:  19 December 2021

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. An understanding of Cochrane’s work and health research more generally is an advantage, but not essential.

We are now looking to recruit our first Director of Development, whose role will be to work with the global community to grow our fundraising income substantially in the coming years.  As a member of the executive leadership team, they will lead the Development Directorate and establish a fundraising operation that works collaboratively to deliver significant global income growth.

Key to success in this role will be the development and implementation of fundraising, marketing, communications, and engagement and influencing strategies – as well as understanding and ideally experience of international fundraising. As such, we are seeking an ambitious and creative individual who relishes a challenge, loves collaborative working, delivers results and has extensive experience of successfully delivering strategy.

The majority of Cochrane Central Executive staff are located in London, UK, however flexible location and/or working arrangement are possible for the right candidate.

How to apply
For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here.  The deadline to receive your application is by 19 December 2021.  The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples.

First interviews likely to be held week beginning 10 January 2022

Tuesday, November 23, 2021 Category: Jobs

The Centre for Epidemic Intervention Research at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, located in Oslo, Norway,  is currently seeking applicants for the following positions:

• 2 full-time researcher positions in effect studies
• 1 full-time Researcher/(bio-)statistician

The overall mission for the newly established centre is to produce more and better evidence on the effects of public health and social interventions, and non-pharmacological infection control measures, specifically. This also includes adverse consequences. The centre will collaborate with researchers, institutions, organisations, and stakeholders both nationally and internationally. The centre works closely with the World Health Organization's intiative to strengthen the evidence base for decisions about public health and social measures.

Application deadline 15 December 2021.

Friday, November 19, 2021 Category: Jobs

In this interview with lead author Christopher Gibbons, we find out more about the recently published review,  Routine provision of information on patient-reported outcome measures to healthcare providers and patients in clinical practice.

Tell us about this review
The aim of this Cochrane Review was to find out whether healthcare workers who receive information from questionnaires completed by their patients give better health care and whether their patients have better health. We collected and analysed all relevant studies.

What did you find out?
Patient questionnaire responses fed back to health workers and patients may result in moderate benefits for patient\provider communication and small benefits for patients' quality of life. Healthcare workers probably make and record more diagnoses and take more notes. The intervention probably makes little or no difference for patient's general perceptions of their health, social functioning, and pain. There appears to be no impact on physical and mental functioning, and fatigue. Our confidence in these results is limited by the quality and number of included studies for each outcome.

What was studied in the review?
When receiving health care, patients are not always asked about how they feel, either about their physical, mental or social health. This can be a problem as knowing how the patient is feeling might help to make decisions about diagnosis and the course of the treatment. One possible solution is to ask the patients to complete questionnaires about their health, and then give that information to the healthcare workers and to patients.

What are the main results of the review?
We found 116 studies (49,785 participants), all of which were from high income countries. We found that feeding back patient questionnaire responses to healthcare workers and patients probably slightly improves quality of life and increases communication between patients and their doctors, but probably does not make a lot of difference to social functioning. We are not sure of the impact on physical and mental functioning or fatigue of feeding back patient questionnaire responses as the certainty of this evidence was assessed as very low. The intervention probably increases diagnosis and note taking. We did not find studies reporting on adverse effects defined as distress following or related to Patient reported outcomes measures (PROM) completion.
 
What would you like to see happen next to provide more evidence in this area?
I would like to see more large, high quality, cluster randomized clinical trials that increase the evidence base for the intervention that use Computerized Adaptive Testing in the measurement of patient reported outcomes. In these interventions, the information which is fed-back combines standardized and individualized measurement, these randomize patients and clinicians to different modalities of feed-back interventions and recipients (including patient only, patient and professional, professional only).

Outcomes of interest include:

• adverse effects
• general health perceptions,
• specific symptoms, (cough, insomnia, nausea, anorexia, constipation, diarrhoea),
• clinicians ratings of severity,
• counselling,
• different types of visits, admissions and their length,
• patient physician relationship,
• unmet patient needs,
• quality of care and costs;
• and that focus on people with multimorbidity

Further research on the mechanisms by which the intervention operates is needed.

• Read the review in full
• Visit the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group page 

Wednesday, November 24, 2021

The latest update of the Cochrane review ‘Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use’ has found that rotavirus vaccines pre-qualified by the World Health Organization (WHO) (Rotarix, RotaTeq, Rotasiil, and Rotavac), prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea in children and no increased risk of serious adverse events was found.

Rotavirus infection is a common cause of diarrhoea in infants and in young children, and can cause mild illness, hospitalization, and death. Since 2009, the WHO has recommended that a rotavirus vaccine be included in all national infant and child immunization programmes. To date, 107 countries have followed this recommendation. In the years before infants and children started receiving rotavirus vaccine, rotavirus infection resulted in about 0.5 million deaths per year in children under five years of age, mainly in low- and middle-income countries.

This Cochrane Review, processed by the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group (CIDG) editorial base at Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, was first published in 2004 and has been updated five times. In 2012, in consultation with the WHO, the data underwent major restructuring by country mortality rates to reflect the observation that vaccine efficacy profiles are different in countries with different mortality rates.

The 2012, 2019, and 2021 review updates were preceded by systematic reviews commissioned by the WHO Immunization, Vaccines & Biologicals department and were used for WHO policy decisions on rotavirus vaccination schedules. These reviews were carried out by members of the author team and the subsequent Cochrane review updates built on the WHO reviews and vice versa.

The most recent review includes 60 studies: Rotarix (36 trials), RotaTeq (15 trials), Rotasiil (5 trials), and Rotavac (4 trials). The findings were presented at Session 6 - Rotavirus Vaccines at the October 2020 SAGE Meeting and was provided to SAGE Members as key background material to inform discussions (access presentation and background materials here).  As a result of this SAGE discussions, an updated WHO Rotavirus Vaccine Position Paper was published on 16 July 2021).  This position paper provides global advice on rotavirus vaccine policy.  In turn, the updated WHO position paper and the supporting background materials support Regional and National Immunization Technical Advisory group discussions which lead to decisions for local rotavirus vaccine policies.

Lead author, Hanna Bergman, noted, “The two globally established vaccines already have a proven track record and we now have high confidence in the two newer vaccines, all showing similar efficacy in preventing severe rotavirus diarrhea in infants and young children in high-mortality settings. This review also reinforces that more work needs to be done to improve and explore the reasons behind the lower efficacy of rotavirus vaccines seen in high-mortality countries.”

Bergman H, Henschke N, Hungerford D, Pitan F, Ndwandwe D, Cunliffe N, Soares‐Weiser K. Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2021, Issue 11. Art. No.: CD008521. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008521.pub6.

The editorial base of the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group is funded by UK aid from the UK government for the benefit of low- and middle-income countries (project number 300342-104). The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the UK government’s official policies.

• Read the full review here
• Visit the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group website here

Thursday, November 18, 2021

This review provides insight into the effectiveness of measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.

While there are limitations to this review, the review demonstrates that a range of different measures can be effective at reducing COVID-19 transmission, especially when multiple interventions are implemented together. Importantly, the review demonstrates that schools can stay open (or reopen) safely when prevention measures are implemented effectively. The effectiveness of interventions is influenced by many things, including the levels of community transmission. Given the rapid and widespread advancements in prevention and containment measures, most notably, the COVID-19 vaccines and increases in testing capacity, as well as the rise of more transmissible variants of the virus, an update to this review may yield very different results.

What was studied in the review?
In order to reduce the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, many governments and societies put mitigation measures in place in schools. However, we do not know whether these measures work with regards to reducing the spread of the virus, or how these measures affect other aspects of life, such as education, the economy or society as a whole.

Key messages
Reopening schools or keeping schools open while having a broad range of measures in place can reduce transmission of the virus that causes COVID-19. Such measures can also reduce the number of people who will need to go to hospital due to developing COVID-19. However very little is known about other consequences of these measures, such as those linked to education, resources, and physical or mental health, as this knowledge is mostly based on studies modelling the real world. More studies set in the real world using real-world data are needed.

Lead author Shari Krishnaratne explains:

“This review provides insight into the effectiveness of measures implemented in schools to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Whilst the review addresses a very important question there are limitations to the evidence it provides. We searched for studies for the review in December 2020, at a time when there was a lack of real-world evidence. As such, most of the studies included in this review use modelling. This review therefore shows an overall absence of real-world evidence about the effectiveness of these measures. However, there is enough evidence from the modelling studies and in other reviews such as one on travel measures for us to have some confidence that there is likely to be a positive effect on transmission, but how an intervention works in one location might not be the same as in another.
 
There are limitations to the evidence, but it does suggest that schools can stay open (or reopen) safely when prevention measures are implemented effectively. The effectiveness of interventions is influenced by many things, including the levels of community transmission. Given the rapid and widespread advancements in prevention and containment measures, most notably, the COVID-19 vaccines and increases in testing capacity, as well as the rise of more transmissible variants of the virus, an update to this review may yield very different results.”

What are measures implemented in the school setting?
Measures in the school setting can be grouped into the following four broad categories.

1. Measures reducing the opportunity for contacts: by reducing the number of students in a class or a school, opening certain school types only (for example primary schools) or by creating a schedule by which students attend school on different days or in different weeks, the face-to-face contact between students can be reduced.
2. Measures making contacts safer: by putting measures in place such as face masks, improving ventilation by opening windows or using air purifiers, cleaning, handwashing, or modifying activities like sports or music, contacts can be made safer.
3. Surveillance and response measures: screening for symptoms or testing sick or potentially sick students, or teachers, or both, and putting them into isolation (for sick people) or quarantine (for potentially sick people).
4. Multicomponent measures: measures from categories 1, 2 and 3 are combined.

What is the aim of the review?
The authors aimed to find out which measures implemented in the school setting allow schools to safely reopen, stay open, or both, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

What did we do?
They searched for studies that looked at the impact of these types of measures in the school setting on the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, the impact on the healthcare system (i.e. how many hospital beds are needed), as well as important social aspects (i.e. how often students attended school). The studies could focus on students, teachers and other school staff, as well as on families and the whole community. They could use real-life data (observational studies) or data from computer-generated simulations (modelling studies).

View the video in German, French, or Spanish

What are the main results of the review?
The authors found 38 relevant studies. Most of these were modelling studies (33 studies). Five studies used real-world data. Twenty studies were conducted in North or South America, 16 in Europe and two in China.

Below we summarise the main findings by category.

1. Measures reducing the opportunity for contacts
   The authors found 23 modelling studies assessing measures to reduce the opportunity for contacts. All studies showed reductions in the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19 and the use of the healthcare system. Some studies also showed a reduction in the number of days spent in school due to the intervention.
2. Measures making contacts safer
   The authors found 11 modelling studies and two real-world studies looking at measures, such as mask wearing in schools, cleaning, handwashing, and ventilation. Five of these studies combined multiple measures, which means we cannot see which specific measures worked and which did not. Most studies showed reductions in the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19; some studies, however, showed mixed or no effects.
3. Surveillance and response measures
   We found 13 modelling studies and one real-world study assessing surveillance and response measures. Twelve studies focused on mass testing and isolation measures, while two looked specifically at symptom-based screening and isolation. Most studies showed results in favour of the intervention, however some showed mixed or no effects
4. Multicomponent measures
   They found three studies that looked at multicomponent interventions, where it was not possible to determine the effect of each individual intervention. These included one modelling study and two real-world studies. These studies assessed physical distancing, modification of activities, cancellation of sports or music classes, testing, exemption of high-risk students, handwashing, and face masks. Most studies showed reduced transmission of the virus that causes COVID-19, however some showed mixed or no effects.

How confident are we in the findings of this review?
Confidence in these results is limited. Most studies used models, that is, they estimated the effects of the interventions rather than observing outcomes. As the models are built on assumptions about how the virus spreads and how people behave, we lack real-world evidence. Many studies were published as 'preprints' without undergoing rigorous checks of published studies, which further limits confidence. Also, the studies were very different from each other (for example, with regards to the levels of transmission in the community).

How up to date is this evidence?
The evidence is up-to-date to December 2020. It is expected this review will be updated in Spring 2022.

• Read the full review
• Visit the Cochrane Public Health group website

Monday, January 17, 2022

Cochrane Library Special Collections provide a round-up of up-to-date Cochrane evidence on a specific topic. This Special Collection contains Cochrane Reviews summarizing data on the benefits and harms of several interventions for preventing and treating influenza. The Cochrane Reviews look at  vaccines, antiviral drugs, and physical interventions, such as the use of masks and hand washing.

This evidence for physical interventions may help inform policies and practices relevant to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. These comprehensive reviews provide valuable information for patients, doctors, and healthcare decision-makers about what steps to take or interventions to use to prevent influenza or aid its treatment.

• View the Special Collection
• Visit the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections website 

Thursday, December 9, 2021

New podcast series looks at initiatives to wind back the medical excess that is causing harm to people and the planet.

 

Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare has joined forces with the BMJ to launch a new podcast series called The Recovery - Voices of action towards sustainable healthcare co-hosted by The BMJ’s Editor in Chief Dr Fiona Godlee and journalist and Bond University health researcher Dr Ray Moynihan.

The series will feature compelling and inspirational conversations with healthcare researchers, doctors, and activists from around the world who are actively working to wind back medical excess and forge more sustainable healthcare systems to improve our health, wellbeing, and climate.   

Over six episodes, listeners will hear about new and sometimes radical initiatives that are changing the way doctors practice medicine, to ensure better access to high quality, evidence-based, and safe healthcare.

Highlights include: 

• Australian doctors fearlessly challenging professional norms to wind back ineffective and dangerous care
• A high-profile cancer specialist in India helping to reduce wasteful care in low- and middle-income countries
• A US-based doctor leading a non-violent revolution of care, built on compassion and solidarity
• A UK general practitioner championing physical activity, creating garden spaces, and improving access to fresh food, to empower patients, improve equity, and enhance the community’s wellbeing and health

“All these voices are part of a growing global chorus campaigning for fundamental reform of how we practice medicine and showing that radical new alternatives are imminently feasible,” write Godlee, Moynihan and Dr Minna Johansson, Director of Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare in an opinion article to launch the series.

“All those unnecessary tests, treatments, and diagnoses bring direct harm to people through adverse effects of drugs and surgeries, psychosocial harms of labelling, and increasing the burden of treatments. And since resources for healthcare are finite, waste is also harming patients indirectly because the overuse of some medical interventions means there are less resources to tackle underuse and underdiagnosis in other areas.”

They acknowledge that the drivers of unsustainable healthcare are complex and diverse and say we must adapt to support more sustainable decision-making within healthcare. 

“Most healthcare extends lives and reduces suffering, but too much medicine remains unnecessary and harmful,” they warn. “Reducing medical excess is not primarily about saving money, it is about avoiding harm to people and the planet.”

We hope this podcast series will inspire listeners all over the world to imagine novel and radical approaches for a more sustainable healthcare, and to dare to move from imagination to action.

• Listen to the The Recovery podcast
• Visit the Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare website
• Read 'Spotlight on Cochrane’s Sustainable Healthcare Field: An interview with Minna Johansson'

Monday, November 15, 2021

Tuesday, November 9, 2021

In this interview with Dr. Minna Johansson, Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare Field Director we learn more about the work of this field, the issues it wants to address and some of the ways they are engaging audiences to learn more.

Can you tell us about the Sustainable Healthcare Field?
Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare is a new Cochrane group focused on addressing medical excess. The background for our work is the notion that medical excess threatens the health of individuals and poses challenges for health system sustainability - and the need of an evidence base better suited to support sustainable decisions about healthcare. In essence, we are developing a global network for collaboration with partners within and beyond Cochrane on activities ranging from short‐term research projects to longer‐term reform initiatives.

What is the field’s main goal?
Our fundamental aim is to contribute to a more sustainable healthcare for patients, for health systems, for our societies, and for the planet. Our more concrete goals are to enhance the relevance of primary research and evidence synthesis to tackle medical excess, and to increase the use of that evidence to enable a more sustainable healthcare.

Who is involved?
I am leading the work, together with Dina Muscat Meng who is coordinator of Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare. But more importantly, during these first two years since the launch we have had enormous support, help and engagement from a broad international network of highly skilled people who have generously contributed with time and resources to help bring this work further. Some of these people and organizations are mentioned at our website. We would like to especially thank Cochrane Sweden and Cochrane Denmark. We will develop this network further by partnering with primary researchers, funders of research, organizations working with evidence synthesis, guideline developers, policy makers, health systems organizations, professional medical associations, citizen and patient organizations, and the general public. We welcome anyone who is interested in this initiative to contact us.

Where can we go to learn more?
An Editorial about us is available here, and at our website you can read more about our work.

We are just about to launch a pop-up podcast series; “The Recovery – Voices of action towards sustainable healthcare” - co-published with The BMJ. In these podcasts, our co-hosts Ray Moynihan from Bond University and Fiona Godlee, editor in chief of The BMJ, meet thought-leaders around the world who are cutting the edge of sustainable healthcare. From Mumbai to Minnesota, you will hear about new initiatives that are changing the way we practice medicine, to ensure better access to high quality, evidence-based, and safe healthcare. The series includes an interview with Rachelle Buchbinder and Ian Harris, recent author of book, Hippocrasy: How doctors are betraying their oath.

Further, in collaboration with people from Cochrane Argentina, Cochrane Chile, Cochrane Methods, Cochrane Sweden and Cochrane Denmark, we have recently launched a Special Collection of Cochrane Reviews featuring examples of resource-intense interventions, including those requiring extra healthcare visits, for which there is high or moderate certainty evidence that they confer clinically small or no effects, and for which there is some evidence of harm to patients. The reviews are particularly relevant to the COVID-19 pandemic, and should inform guideline, and policy developers, and decision makers planning health care, both during and after the pandemic. This Special Collection is intended as the first in a series, with subsequent Collections focusing on other healthcare interventions shown to being ineffective, harmful, or unproven.

What is planned in the future?
We have a wide range of exciting projects in pipeline – one of the most exciting in my opinion is a collaboration with GRADE where we are just about to form a GRADE Working Group focused on medical excess. We are also working on a project evaluating the quality and balance of messaging in disease awareness campaigns observed by the WHO, Cochrane and the US government – and we plan to develop reporting guidance for such campaigns, which can be used by campaign organizers to ensure high quality and balanced messaging when developing a campaign, as well as by organizations and authorities when deciding on whether to endorse a campaign or not. We also aim to develop our collaboration with international and regional stakeholders – such as for example Choosing Wisely.

In conclusion, the need for novel approaches to tackle medical excess is increasingly recognized. We believe that an intensified focus on projects and initiatives that cross the traditional boundaries between the different stakeholders in the evidence chain is required. The reasons for these challenges are diverse and complex, and so are the solutions – a strong collaboration integrating differing and sometimes contradictory perspectives is indicated. This will undoubtedly be challenging, but a more sustainable healthcare will benefit individual patients, as well as our communities.

• Visit the Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare Field website

Monday, November 8, 2021

The 2021 Journal Citation Report has been released by Clarivate Analytics, and we are delighted to announce that the Journal Impact Factor for the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) is now 12.008. This is an increase on the 2020 Journal Impact Factor, which was 9.289.

The CDSR Journal Impact Factor is calculated by taking the total number of citations in a given year to all Cochrane Reviews published in the past two years and dividing that number by the total number of Reviews published in the past two years. While Journal Impact Factor is a useful measure of average citation frequency, we recognize that it is not the only measure of success or impact.  

Some highlights from the CDSR 2021 Journal Citation Report:

• CDSR is ranked 19th of the 172 journals in the Medicine, General & Internal category
• CDSR received 92,845 cites in the 2021 Journal Impact Factor period, compared with 81,212 in 2020 
• The 5-Year Journal Impact Factor is 11.956 compared with 9.871 in 2020

Cochrane Library’s Editor in Chief, Karla Soares-Weiser, commented: “I am delighted to see a rise in Impact Factor for the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Cochrane’s efforts to publish high quality reviews on COVID-19 have clearly made an impact, as several of these make up our top 20 cited reviews for 2021. All of these data demonstrate the continuing usage and impact of Cochrane Reviews and reflect enormous credit on our many thousands of contributors and groups.”

• Read about how the CDSR Journal Impact Factor is calculated

 

Thursday, June 30, 2022

The Science Basement Podcast is a podcast hosted by young scientists and scientists-in-training who share their excitement about science and science communication. They have conversations with scientists and other guests with the aim of making complicated ideas understandable to non-scientists, while showing why science matters.

Here we highlight some episodes where they talked to people in the Cochrane Community: 

Let's talk about an epidemic of misinformation Episode 5 with Anastasiia & Eleanna with guest Tiffany

• Available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and SoundCloud

Tell us if you are not confused when you scroll your newsfeed or change TV channels and see a whole array of opinions on each and every topic. One example you can probably relate to is the COVID crisis: vaccines or no vaccines, masks or no masks - which information is true? Who should we listen to in the end?

 

The name of this problem is “infodemic”. It means just what you think it means. In this episode, we are talking to Tiffany Duque, a senior advisor at Cochrane, about infodemic, expanding to the topic of misinformation in research and how to manage it.

In 2021, they spoke with members of Cochrane over three episodes:

Episode 1 - Cochrane Reviews in times of COVID-19 with Dr John Lavis

• Available on Spotify, iTunes, and SoundCloud

Tomàs Garnier  Artiñano and  Lea Urpa interview Dr. John Lavis. John is a member of the Cochrane editorial board, member of the Cochrane knowledge-translation advisory group, and founder and director of the McMaster Health Forum, which hosts COVID-END. John speaks about what we know about COVID-19 so far, the importance of evidence synthesis and Living Systematic Reviews, how the media covers science, and Cochrane's Plain Language Summaries, translation work, and how Cochrane works with patients and careers. 

 Episode 2 -  Systematic Reviews: How do scientists collect information? 

• Available on Spotify, iTunes, and SoundCloud

Giuliano Didio and Elmo Saarentaus discuss with the Cochrane Reveiwer Fiona Stewart about what is a systematic review and... how to make one. Fiona is a Network Support Fellow for Cochrane, an international not-for-profit organisation for independent health care research. She has over ten years of experience working in health services research and has published several systematic reviews on topics ranging from pregnancy to urinary incontinence to obesity. Fiona explains what a systematic review is, how we involve the public in our work, how our plain language summaries makes our evidence accessible, and the importance of our knowledge transfer and translation work. 

Episode 3 - How can we assess scientific information?

• Available on  Spotify, iTunes, and SoundCloud

In this episode Eleanna Asvestari & Katja Kaurinkoski discuss with Jack Nunn the importance of making science accessible and how to assess critically all the information around us. Jack  is the founder and Director of the non-for-profit education organisation Science for All, and co-creator of ‘Standardised Data on Initiatives (STARDIT), a PhD researcher at the Department of Public Health at La Trobe University,  recently appointed member of the Cochrane Consumer Network Executive and part of  Cochrane's Advocacy Advisory group.

Learn more about the Science Basement podcast by following them on Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. 

Tuesday, August 15, 2023

Monthly issues will cease after Issue 12 (December), 2021. All downloaded content will continue to be available within the app.

Thank you to everyone who has downloaded and read Cochrane Reviews via the app.

The Cochrane Library App presents the latest up-to-date evidence from the Cochrane Library in a convenient, easy to navigate format which provides you with relevant, accessible research, when you need it, from the world’s leading experts in evidence-informed health care.

All content in the app is free and new issues will download regularly.

• Download the app from iTunes (iPad and iPhone)
• Download the app from GooglePlay (Android)
  

Our monthly issues feature a hand-picked selection of Cochrane Systematic Reviews, specifically chosen by the Editor-in-chief.  Abridged Cochrane Reviews provide the best possible tablet and phone reading experience and they are downloadable for reading offline. The Bookmark feature allows you to create your own special collection of Cochrane Reviews across issues. Additionally, the title page for every review includes a link to the full version of the review available on the Cochrane Library.

Hello, and welcome to the December 2021 issue of the Cochrane Library app.

This month’s edition covers a variety of topics including exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease, decision coaching for making healthcare decisions, rehabilitation for older people with hip fractures, antiemetics to prevent nausea and vomiting caused by chemotherapy,  antibiotics for hospital-acquired pneumonia in neonates and children, prevention of dementia and cognitive decline, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for women undergoing breast surgery, and vitamin C supplementation for prevention and treatment of pneumonia.

Our main review this month is ‘Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use’. Rotavirus is a common cause of diarrhoea, diarrhoea‐related hospital admissions, and diarrhoea‐related deaths worldwide. Authors from the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group evaluated rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO for their efficacy and safety in children.

The abridged versions of these reviews are available in this issue. Visit www.cochranelibrary.com to read the full versions.

Our monthly issues produced exclusively for the app feature a hand‐picked selection of Cochrane Systematic Reviews, specifically abridged to provide the best possible mobile reading experience. You can create your own special themed collection of Cochrane Reviews across issues in the app on topics such as occupational health by using the app’s Bookmark feature.

The title page for every review included in this and previous issues includes a link to the full version of the review available on the Cochrane Library at www.cochranelibrary.com

• Download the free Cochrane Library App from iTunes or GooglePlay today!
  

Friday, December 17, 2021

The global Cochrane community are walking 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.

Who is Anne Anderson?
Anne Anderson was a contributor to the stream of thinking and effort that gave birth to evidence-based health care. A clinically qualified reproductive physiologist, Anne had an active interest in women’s health, co-editing the first edition of Women’s Problems in General Practice with Ann McPherson and contributed to Effectiveness and Satisfaction in Antenatal Care (1982), edited by Murray Enkin and Iain Chalmers. She was discussing with Marc Keirse and Iain Chalmers the possibility of co-editing a companion volume on elective birth, however her premature death from breast cancer in 1983 ended her involvement. Anne Anderson was 46 years old when she died. Iain Chalmers, Murray Enkin and Marc Keirse went on to publish Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth (ECPC) in 1989, dedicating the book in part to Anne. ECPC, through its systematic approach to assessing the research literature, is widely acknowledged to have led to development of Cochrane. 

What is the Cochrane Anne Anderson Award?
In the footsteps of Anne Anderson, many outstanding women continue to contribute and inspire other women to improve health knowledge for the good of their communities. Often these women are quiet achievers who might otherwise not be recognized. The goal of the Anne Anderson Award is to recognize and stimulate individuals contributing to the enhancement of women’s visibility and participation in the Cochrane leadership. The award is given to a Cochrane member who has contributed meaningfully to the promotion of women as leaders and contributors to the organization. 

The Anne Anderson Award winner receives a plaque from Cochrane honouring her contributions, as well as a cash award. The recipient designates the cash award to assist a woman from a low-resource setting with Cochrane activities.

What's the Anne Anderson Walk?
The Cochrane Colloquium, our annual flagship event, brings together the world’s most influential health researchers, scientists, academics, opinion leaders, clinicians, and patients to promote evidence-informed decision-making. It is here that the award is given out and the fundraising walk is held. The annual Anne Anderson Walk is a cherished annual social event, where attendees explore the Colloquium host-city by foot with a guide. Donations by participants are made to next year's Anne Anderson Award. 

Given current COVID-19 circumstances, Cochrane community's will be not be gathering in 2022 for a Colloquium. However, we are walking  together virtually and sharing pictures of our walks.

How can I participate?
All Cochrane Members and Supporters are welcome to participate in this virtual walk and fundraising effort! 

• Make a donation to the Anne Anderson Award 
• Submit a picture of your walk
• Anne Anderson Blog Series:
  • Karla Soares-Weiser
  • Catherine Marshall
  • Jackie Ho
  • Sarah Tanveer
  • Cindy Farquhar
  • Eva Madrid

Thursday, February 10, 2022