NDLI: Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions

Content Provider	Springer Nature : BioMed Central
Author	Wang, Xue Hawkins, Barbara S. Dickersin, Kay
Abstract	Background Systematic reviews of interventions provide a summary of the evidence available on intervention effectiveness and harm. Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) have been published electronically in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) since 1994, and co-publication (publication of a Cochrane review in another journal) has been allowed since that time, as long as the co-publishing journal has agreed to the arrangement. Although standards for co-publication were established in 2008, the frequency of co-publication and adherence to the standards have remained largely unexamined. Our objective was to examine the frequency of co-publication of Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group (CEVG) reviews, adherence to the co-publication policy, the relative numbers of citations of the two modes of publishing, and differences in times cited in CSRs with and without a co-publication. Methods We identified all CEVG reviews published by May 30, 2014 in The Cochrane Library. Using keywords from the title, author names, and “Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group”, we searched Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases to identify possible co-publications. We also emailed contact authors of all identified CEVG reviews to ask them whether they had published their CSR elsewhere. We compared each co-publication to the corresponding CEVG review for adherence to the Cochrane Policy Manual (dated June 10, 2014). We recorded the number of times each CEVG review and each co-publication had been cited by others according to Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus, as of June 11, 2014. Results We identified 117 CEVG reviews;19 had been co-published in 22 articles. Adherence to Cochrane policy on co-publication was moderate, with all authors complying with at least one of four requirements we addressed. Co-publications were cited more often than the corresponding CEVG reviews; CEVG reviews with at least one co-publication were cited approximately twice as often as CEVG reviews without a co-publication. The number of citations varied considerably depending on whether the CEVG review had a co-publication or not. Conclusions The findings support encouraging co-publication while maintaining the primacy of the Cochrane systematic review. Support for co-publication may be tempered by other factors such as the possibility that CEVG reviews with a co-publication covered more clinically important and timely topics than those without a co-publication. Assuming that citations are a valid measure of dissemination effectiveness, the 15-year CEVG experience with co-publication of systematic reviews suggests that Cochrane authors should be encouraged to co-publish in traditional medical journals.
Related Links	https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s13643-015-0104-5.pdf
Ending Page	9
Page Count	9
Starting Page	1
File Format	HTM / HTML
ISSN	20464053
DOI	10.1186/s13643-015-0104-5
Journal	Systematic Reviews
Issue Number	1
Volume Number	4
Language	English
Publisher	BioMed Central
Publisher Date	2015-09-22
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Medicine Public Health Biomedicine Statistics for Life Sciences Health Sciences Cochrane reviews Co-publication Citation Medicine/Public Health
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Medicine
Journal Impact Factor	6.3/2023
5-Year Journal Impact Factor	4.5/2023

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions

Citation of updated and co-published Cochrane Methodology Reviews

Publication of reviews synthesizing child health evidence (PORSCHE): a survey of authors to identify factors associated with publication in Cochrane and non-Cochrane sources

Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study

The evolution of assessing bias in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: celebrating methodological contributions of the Cochrane Collaboration

Comparative analysis of Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews over three decades

Maintaining relevance in HIV systematic reviews: an evaluation of Cochrane reviews

Online dissemination of Cochrane reviews on digital health technologies: a cross-sectional study

Celebrating methodological challenges and changes: reflecting on the emergence and importance of the role of qualitative evidence in Cochrane reviews

Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions

Similar Documents

Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions

Citation of updated and co-published Cochrane Methodology Reviews

Publication of reviews synthesizing child health evidence (PORSCHE): a survey of authors to identify factors associated with publication in Cochrane and non-Cochrane sources

Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study

The evolution of assessing bias in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: celebrating methodological contributions of the Cochrane Collaboration

Comparative analysis of Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews over three decades

Maintaining relevance in HIV systematic reviews: an evaluation of Cochrane reviews

Online dissemination of Cochrane reviews on digital health technologies: a cross-sectional study

Celebrating methodological challenges and changes: reflecting on the emergence and importance of the role of qualitative evidence in Cochrane reviews

Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions