Personal tools
You are here: Home → IMSG → MAG → Minutes → MAG minutes, 6 December 2000
 

MAG minutes, 6 December 2000

Minutes of the ModMan Advisory Group meeting held at the UK Cochrane Centre on 6 December 2000

Minutes approved on 27 March 2001

Present: Claire Allen (minutes), Mandy Collingwood, Jane Dennis (from 2pm), Monica Fischer, Sonja Henderson (Convenor), Kate Henshaw, Rasmus Moustgaard, Jacob Riis, Reive Robb, Lois Sims.

Apologies: Graham Mowatt, Phil Wiffen.

Contents:
Welcome
Approval of agenda
Approval of minutes of 26 October 2000
Matters arising from the minutes of 26 October 2000
ModMan development (including the Wishlist)
ModMan documentation
Citing the description of the work of individual CRGs
Tracking
Reviewers' IDs
ModMan workshops
Quality checking of reviews - validation and rules
Withdrawing reviews
Cross referencing reviews and protocols across Groups
Any other business
Date of next meeting

  1. Welcome

    2. Mandy welcomed everyone to the meeting. Apologies had been received from Graham Mowatt and Phil Wiffen.

  2. Approval of agenda

    3. The agenda was approved. Monica added the item 'Default statistics' to 'Any other business'.

  3. Approval of minutes of 26 October 2000

    4. The minutes of 26 October 2000 were agreed and Kate agreed to send these approved minutes to Jacob for inclusion on the web site.
    Action: Kate

  4. Matters arising from the minutes of 26 October 2000

    1. SR and HM Codes - (a) Item 3(b) Lois reported that Mark Starr had not circulated a list of all HM and SR codes to each CRG as it had been decided that this would be downloadable from the web. Lois agreed to investigate the coding issues for CRG's HM and SR codes.
      Action: Lois
    2. Frequently asked questions - (d) Item 7 Jane had compiled a list of frequently asked questions and she agreed to send an electronic copy of the list to Lois so that a list akin to this can be put on the data providers' web page.
      Action: Jane, Lois
    3. ModMan e-mail discussion list - (e) Item 10 It was noted that the ModMan e-mail discussion list was not being used for its purpose and should, therefore, be disbanded. Monica agreed to inform Georg Koch of this decision. The adminors e-mail discussion list would be used to discuss ModMan issues with RGCs. To enable Rasmus and Jacob to be in the ModMan information communication loop, Sonja agreed to copy them in on all e-mails sent to the adminors e-mail discussion list regarding ModMan issues.
      Action: Monica, Sonja
    4. Future development of ModMan - Item 5 Lois advised that the bugs in ModMan 4.0.2 will be described on Update Software's website until the next release of ModMan when responsibility for notification of bugs should pass to others as Update Software are no longer responsible for its development. Sonja agreed to speak to Jini Hetherington regarding adding information about existing bugs (and the location of the website) to the induction pack for new RGCs. Lois agreed that the ModMan wishlist could be put on the website during this time too.
      Action: Sonja, Lois
    5. Contact details - Item 7 Sonja explained that a message had been sent some time ago to the adminors discussion list regarding the issue that current contact details should be kept in RevMan rather than ModMan. It was agreed that the current ModMan documentation was out of date and that it should be revisited. Monica suggested an erratum sheet indicating the changes. Lois agreed to write up more details of the bug list, asking specific RGCs for more information when necessary. Once MAG had had an opportunity to comment, the details should be circulated more widely and added to the web site.
      Action: Lois

  5. ModMan development (including the Wishlist)

    6. It had been agreed at the previous MAG meeting that an interim ModMan upgrade would take place in 2001. This interim version would not include major additions to the program but it would be mandatory to upgrade to it. The Nordic Cochrane Centre would support the interim version. Jacob agreed to update the ModMan Help file for the interim version. Sonja agreed to speak to Mike Clarke about the updating of the Module Guidelines, which are also held in ModMan. The updated Module Guidelines should be sent to Jacob when they are available.
    Action: Jacob, Sonja

    Rasmus had received the 'program' from Update Software and was ready to work on the upgrade. However, he needed detailed requirements before doing so. It was agreed, therefore, to go through the ModMan screen dumps provided by Mandy to discuss specific requirements as well as discuss each item on the 'wish list' in turn. Each 'wish list' item would then be assigned to one of two lists: those for incorporation into the interim version (ModMan 4.1) and those that would be considered for future development (ModMan 5). The major factors in deciding if the wishes should be taken on for the interim version would be (a) desirability (b) programming resources.

    It was agreed that whenever discussing the ModMan wish list, the following principles should apply:

    1. Main function to submit modules
    2. Simple to use
    3. Safe haven for protocols, reviews and group details
    4. It should not possible to edit protocols/reviews in ModMan
    5. Easy to see status of protocols and reviews
    6. Robust program not susceptible to crashes

    The following items were discussed as being appropriate for inclusion in the interim version of ModMan 4 (i.e. ModMan 4.1):

    1. The following changes to the Module status report will be implemented:

    • Removal of the date entered
    • Addition of date of last substantive update and date of last minor update
    • Addition of review number
    • Removal of the withdrawn column
    • Withdrawn protocols and withdrawn reviews will be moved to separate headings at the end of the report
    2. Review/Protocol/Title tracking screens will be redesigned with a bigger list at the top, which is always visible. The tracking (chasing) table will be moved to a separate page so there are three pages: Review details, Tracking, and General Notes.
    3. Review/protocol/title tracking screens will show where ModMan links to.
    4. Non-existent titles / broken links for non-primary versions will no longer be shown on the review/protocol/title tracking screens.
    5. Ability to print different sections of the editorial information using check boxes like RevMan.
    6. Ability to print on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper (Letter format).
    7. Ability to spell check the module text.
    8. The topics list will not expand fully by default.
    9. Help file and 'Guidelines for completing a review' will be updated. The documentation should contain advice on establishing a back-up policy.

    These wishes will only be implemented if time allows. Otherwise they will remain on the wish list:

    10. Ability to search the topics list.
    11. Ability to export the module in HTML format.
    12. ModMan logo the, i.e. the man in the suit with a brief case, will be changed or removed.
    13. Edit menu will be enabled for the text of module.
    14. Printed topic list will have bullet points and the review status will be displayed to the left of the title.
    15. Ability to export the module in XML format.

    In addition, version 4.1 will fix the known bugs in ModMan 4.0.2

    The following items will not be incorporated into the interim version but will remain on the wish list:

    1. ModMan should not be connected to RevMan. Most RGCs preferred approved protocols/reviews to be stored separately in ModMan for publication.
    2. Separate tracking from ModMan.
    3. Export a list of titles in ModMan (tracking).
    4. Report listing review number, contact id, and review title for each review (tracking).
    5. Ability to edit the topic list more easily. Rasmus agreed to check what this meant and call for suggestions if necessary.
    6. Ability to export parts of the topic list.
    7. Option to print the topics list as seen on screen.
    8. To be able to add titles of protocols and reviews at different levels in the topics list and not just at the lowest level. Sonja will check if a change of policy is needed.
    9. A new fixed heading to go under the 'Editorial information' heading to give the contributions of individuals whose names appear in the module citation.
    10. To change 'Internal' and 'External' sources of support to 'Intramural' and 'Extramural' sources of support in ModMan or the other way around in RevMan.
    11. A system for checking that no mandatory sections are missing from published reviews.

    Wishes still under discussion:

    The issue about the removal of contact details is under discussion because of possible implications for MeerKat. In particular, it may impact on the work of TSCs using MeerKat. The proposals under discussion are:

    • Only the contact details for the CRG contact person will be held in ModMan. It must be decided whether the program should delete all other contacts when installed, or if the user should do this.
    • The following items on the file menu dealing with contact details will be removed from the File menu: 'Update contacts with details from RevMan', 'Export/HireX - Contacts', 'Export/MeerKat files/Reviewers'. It will be mandatory to select a contact person for the group.

    If only the contact details for the CRG contact person are to be held in ModMan 4.1, there will no longer be a need for the following wishes:

    • Print a list of contact IDs
    • Print all contacts
    • Import contact details from RevMan, Access, etc
    These wishes should be transferred to the RevMan wish list.

    The implications for MeerKat when contact details are not held in ModMan should be explored. Therefore, Sonja agreed to raise the issue of possible implications for MeerKat at the Information Management System Group meeting on 7 December. Lois also agreed to check what the impact would be for MeerKat if contact details were removed from ModMan.
    Action: Sonja, Lois

    Jacob agreed to remove the item 'list reviews alphabetically from the wishlist as this is possible.
    Action: Jacob

    Sonja agreed to circulate the wishlist item to RGCs in mid December asking for comments within a week. She would resend the message at the beginning of January in case RGCs could not reply because they were on holiday when the original message was sent.
    Action: Sonja

    In addition, Sonja agreed to check if the current documentation contains a policy on backing up.
    Action: Sonja

    Rasmus agreed to have the interim version of ModMan ready for demonstration at the UK Contributors Meeting (being held 26/27 March 2001). Sonja agreed to discuss the possibility of either a separate workshop or a 2-hour slot at the RGC/TSCs' meeting. Sonja agreed to discuss this with the organisers. It was agreed that it was important to ensure that this information was disseminated to RGCs in other parts of the worlds via the European, Australasian and North American meetings in 2001. Sonja would ensure that this happens.
    Action: Rasmus, Sonja

  6. ModMan documentation

    7. Kate agreed to draft ModMan/Module guidance for Co-ordinators, producing a first draft by March 2001, to coincide with Rasmus's demonstration of the interim version.
    Action: Kate

  7. Citing the description of the work of individual CRGs

    8. Lois advised that there was already a place in the coversheet of ModMan for the names of contributors to the module to be entered and suggested that if this is used by the RGC then Update Software could automatically generate the full citation. It was agreed that Sonja would inform Mike Clarke that MAG would like him to request that Update Software generate the citation automatically. It was suggested and agreed that the contribution of individuals could be given under the current heading 'Editorial team'.
    Action: Sonja

  8. Tracking

    9. It was agreed to carry this item forward to the next meeting of the ModMan Advisory Group.
    Action: Sonja

  9. Reviewers' IDs

    10. It was agreed that it was a good idea, in principle, for RGCs to share reviewer IDs and Sonja would raise this at the RGCs/TSCs meeting during the UK Contributors meeting.
    Action: Sonja

  10. ModMan workshops

    11. This had been previously discussed under item 5 above.

  11. Quality checking of reviews - validation and rules

    12. Lois explained that she had undertaken a quality check of all reviews in The Cochrane Library based on a checklist of publication requirements. She had identified 645 'invalid' reviews, examples of which included missing information in a reference and text missing from a section of a review, eg the background of the abstract. The RevMan Advisory Group had produced a checklist of the RevMan file sections that were obligatory and not obligatory to complete before publication. It was unclear whether Lois's publication checklist was different. Lois agreed to prepare a more detailed paper to show the criteria she used for validating published reviews. It was agreed that Sonja would suggest to Mike Clarke that the item Validation rules should be added to the next RAG Agenda for discussion at the first RAG in 2001.
    Action: Lois, Sonja

  12. Withdrawing reviews

    13. Lois agreed to add the process for withdrawing reviews on the data providers' web page. It was suggested that withdrawn reviews should be referenced in the field 'previous publications' in RevMan of the review that had replaced it. However, it was not easy to deal with protocols that had been withdrawn because the reviewer could no longer prepare the review. Guidance is needed as to how to deal with this issue particularly since there are issues about the archiving of The Cochrane Library. Sonja had received a request from the Librarian at the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists asking for advice on how to archive The Cochrane Library as they had a need to access previous publications of reviews but were unable to hold all the issues of The Cochrane Library on their server. Lois suggested that Sonja pass this query to Mark Starr but would look into the issues of archiving too because of concerns raised by users trying to access withdrawn reviews.
    Action: Lois, Sonja

  13. Cross referencing reviews and protocols across Groups

    14. Lois indicated that there might be problems with duplication of reviews in The Cochrane Library. At present, checks had to be made manually by Update Software or RGCs. She suggested that it would be useful to give each review a publication identifier; a unique number that could be used across Groups (if the topic list changed for example), and likened it to the accession number used in MEDLINE. The unique number would be generated at the 'published' protocol stage and Lois agreed to put a proposal forward for the interim issue of ModMan.
    Action: Lois

  14. Any other business

    1. Default statistics

      Monica agreed to send an e-mail to RGCs in early 2001 reminding them that they can choose to change the statistics now or later in the year.
      Action: Monica

  15. Date of next meeting

    16. Sonja agreed to canvass for availability for dates in early 2001.
    Action: Sonja

MAG minutes | MinMan home

Document Actions