Personal tools
You are here: Home → IMSG → Minutes → SDG minutes, 7 December 2000
 

SDG minutes, 7 December 2000

Minutes of the Information Management System Group meeting held at the UK Cochrane Centre on 7 December 2000

Minutes approved on 12 september 2001

Present: Claire Allen (minutes), Gerd Antes, Chris Cates, Mike Clarke, Gordon Dooley (representing Update Software), Monica Fischer (Convenor), Sonja Henderson, Julian Higgins, Rasmus Moustgaard.

Apologies: Mark Starr, Phil Wiffen.

Contents:
Welcome and introductions
Potential conflict of interest
Approval of minutes of 30 May meeting
Approval and matters arising of 3 October meeting
Needs assessment survey
Collaborative Review Group glossaries - recommendation
Comments and criticisms software
Feedback and matters arising from the ModMan Advisory Group meeting on 6 December
Additional graphs in Cochrane reviews - feedback from the Statistical Methods Group meeting in Cape Town
MetaView bugs
Alternative software tools
Feedback from the Steering Group
Contact Management System
Any other business
Date of next meeting

  1. Welcome and introductions

    2. Monica welcomed everyone, particularly Gerd and Gordon who were at their first IMSG meeting. Apologies of absence had been received from the people listed above.

  2. Potential conflict of interest

    3. Each member on the Information Management System Group has been appointed to represent special interests of another advisory group or an entity/group of entities. Representing a special interest, therefore, can in itself be perceived as a potential conflict of interest. It was therefore agreed to list specifically which group/entity each member represents as well as listing other relevant affiliations and potential conflict of interests.

    • Gerd Antes: Representing the Steering Group. None known but possibly in relation to the German Cochrane Centre's responsibility for managing the Collaboration web site.
    • Chris Cates: Convenor of the CritMan Software Advisory Group and the Criticism Management Group, the latter looks at non-software aspects of the comments and criticisms system.
    • Mike Clarke: Convenor of the RevMan Advisory Group. Representing the Steering Group. Editor of the Reviewers' Handbook.
    • Gordon Dooley: Representing Update Software. Involvement in the development of commercial software, e.g. Metaxis, and software for the Cochrane Collaboration, as publisher of The Cochrane Library.
    • Monica Fischer: Convenor of the IMSG. Co-ordinator of software development at the Nordic Cochrane Centre.
    • Sonja Henderson: Convenor of the ModMan Advisory Group. Review Group, Co-ordinator of the largest review group, which also has unstable funding.
    • Julian Higgins: Representing the Statistical Methods Group. Co-editor of the statistical section of the Reviewers' Handbook.

  3. Approval of minutes of 30 May meeting

    4. The minutes of the meeting held on 30 May were approved with the following amendment: (2.2) Change to: "To facilitate production of high quality reviews by optimising use of resources and supporting reviewers"
    Rasmus agreed to upload the amended minutes to the web site and add a hit counter to the site.
    Action: Rasmus

  4. Approval and matters arising of 3 October meeting

    5. The minutes of the meeting held on 3 October were approved with the following amendments: (2) Add Sonja Henderson's information to the list of possible conflicts of interest. (5iv) Change 'should always' to 'could' and 'should' to 'could'.
    Rasmus agreed to upload the amended minutes to the web site.
    Action: Rasmus

    Matters arising

    (3f) Rasmus had received Update Software's XML code for Cochrane reviews and other published documents (e.g. modules - but the Steering Group module). Although appropriate for publishing purposes they need to be modified before using them for exchanging information within the Collaboration. Rasmus agreed to discuss this issue directly with Lois Sims.
    Action: Rasmus

    (5iii) Mark had not yet passed relevant information to Rasmus with regard to the problems Update Software had experienced when importing reviews from RevMan 4.1.
    Action: Mark

    (5b iv) Monica agreed to send an additional reminder to the adminors e-mail discussion list in January 2001 about the possibility of setting reviewer-defined defaults for each outcome. She reported that most RGCs had been in contact with their reviewers to check default settings. Gordon reported that the default statistics would be activated in an Internet trial version, planned to be published along with the current format, in issue 1, 2001 of The Cochrane Library. It was hoped to have an official release in issue 2, 2001.
    Action: Monica

    MetaView 4.1 will be available on issue 1, 2001 of The Cochrane Library along with MetaView 3.1 (note that MetaView 4.1 only runs on 32 bit systems, e.g. Windows 98.). Monica reminded everyone that wording alerting users to this fact and describing its implications for users of 16 bit systems (i.e. defaults statistics would not automatically be available to them) had been discussed with Mark at an earlier meeting. Gordon agreed to follow up on this.
    Action: Gordon

    (6a ii) Sonja advised that Lois would add both the bug and wish lists for ModMan to the Update Software web site and that Sonja had agreed to advise Jini so that the information could be passed to new RGCs.
    Action: Sonja

    (6b v) Sonja advised that the issue of tracking had been postponed to the next ModMan Advisory Group meeting to be held in March 2001.

    (9b) Rasmus had not received Update's XML definition of the Steering Group Module. Gordon agreed to remind Mark.
    Action: Gordon

  5. Needs assessment survey

    6. Mike reported that a pilot survey was due to be circulated the week beginning 18 December and that advice was required as to whom to send it to. Responses from a cross section of people throughout the Collaboration are required to help refine the survey. Mike reported that most data requested would be numerical for ease of analysis. (The full survey should be completed and reported on by June 2001.)

    The target audience would be as follows:

    • People who have avoided using the Collaboration's software.
    • RGCs for large CRGs.
    • RGCs for small CRGs.
    • Co-ordinating editors.
    • Reviewers.
    • People involved in any aspect of the review process.

    When these people are identified, Mike will request information detailing how they are involved in the Collaboration. Everyone agreed to send suggestions to Mike.
    Action: All

    Once the survey questionnaire is ready to be posted to all members in the Collaboration, Julian had volunteered to set up a web page enabling people to complete it on-line.
    Action: Julian

  6. Collaborative Review Group glossaries - recommendation

    7. Mike tabled a discussion paper detailing how glossaries are compiled by CRGs. It was recommended that a single glossary be compiled, and that the methodology glossary should be combined with this. Discussion took place on the recommendations and Mike clarified the following:

    Recommendation 1: Multiple terms will be retained where appropriate and no additional work would be required from RGCs.
    Recommendation 2: In the long term, Sonja should discuss this issue with the ModMan Advisory Group as there is an impact on the wish list for ModMan 5.
    Recommendation 3: Update Software will supply a file with glossaries for Mike to work on.
    Recommendation 4: Mike will advise RGCs if there are problems with their terms (e.g. typographical errors) but will not take on editorial responsibility. Mike agreed to investigate translating 'terms' (but not definitions) through a web translator.
    Recommendation 7: Update Software should advise the Publishing Policy Group on feasibility, not the IMSG.
    Recommendation 9: The UKCC will re-assess this project before the end of the pilot period.

    Action: Sonja, Mark, Mike

    It was agreed to support the recommendations in the paper with the clarifications above and Mike agreed to seek the endorsement of the Steering Group for the proposal.
    Action: Mike

  7. Comments and criticisms software

    8. Chris outlined the background to the software problems that had begun in June 2000. It seemed that the automatic notification system had failed and, once the problems had been identified, the system had been reviewed. The parties involved are now working towards a BMJ style approach whereby each comment is posted to a site and pre-screened to ensure they are neither tests, obscene or libellous. Iain Chalmers and Chris had been proposed to undertake this task. After screening, comments would be posted to a public web site and to the individual CRG for further action. Mike agreed to advise entities that the system is now running and that any further questions should be sent to Chris.
    Action: Mike

    It was agreed that the new software should be considered with the future development of the Information Management System and it was also agreed to survey criticism editors separately to assess their needs once the main survey results had been reported.

  8. Feedback and matters arising from the ModMan Advisory Group meeting on 6 December

    9. Sonja advised it had been agreed to introduce an interim version of ModMan (4.1) at the time of the UK Contributors Meeting in March 2001.

    There had been much discussion on tracking but this had been carried forward to the next MAG meeting that would be held in March 2001. It had been agreed in principle that tracking should be separated from ModMan.

    It had also been agreed not to hold contact details in ModMan (as all contact details were now being held in RevMan) and it was noted that investigations were being carried out as to whether this affected users of MeerKat.

    Sonja agreed to keep Mike informed of changes required to the guidelines for completion of the text content of the CRG module as a result of ModMan developments. In addition, Sonja would keep Mike informed of any major changes to the structure of the topics list. The module guidelines will be added to the Handbook as an appendix. Kate Henshaw had agreed to prepare a User Guide for the use of ModMan for RGCs.

    It was suggested that for module citation, the CRG would input author names into ModMan and that Update Software would generate the citation automatically. Other contributions could be listed under 'Editorial information'. Mike agreed to follow up this issue with Lois Sims of Update Software.
    Action: Mike

  9. Additional graphs in Cochrane reviews - feedback from the Statistical Methods Group meeting in Cape Town

    1. Additional Graphs
      The consultation, which Mike and Jon Deeks had undertaken shows that there is a clear need to be able to include additional graphs in Cochrane reviews. This was supported by the RevMan Advisory Group. It was agreed that CRGs would have ultimate editorial responsibility for what is submitted to Update Software.

      It was agreed that a working group be formed to suggest a proposal for moving this issue forward and to look at what the options are for packaging graphs with a review. Rasmus would convene the group, and it would include representatives from Update Software and a CRG (nominated by Sonja) and report back with a proposal by end of March 2001.
      Action: Rasmus, Gordon, Sonja

    2. Feedback from the Statistical Methods Group meeting in Cape Town
      Julian reported that concerns had been raised in allowing some kinds of graphs and not others. A set of recommendations was being drafted prior to the next meeting of the IMSG, which would cover some types of graphs and pictures. Julian agreed that each type of graph or picture would have a recommendation with it.
      Action: Julian

  10. MetaView bugs

    11. MetaView bugs had been discussed previously in the RevMan Advisory Group meeting and it was apparent that users of MetaView were unclear of how they solicited support for the software. Gordon reported that if there were problems with the software (including bugs), it was Update's responsibility. Issues concerning the statistical methods available in MetaView should be directed to the Statistical Methods Group. Gordon also reported that, once MetaView 4.1 is packed with the Cochrane Library, information on bugs would be posted at a specific web page which would also be accessible to users of the Cochrane Library. Gordon agreed to advise Mark that further clarification of this situation should be provided for the next IMSG meeting.
    Action: Gordon

  11. Alternative software tools

    12. It was agreed to carry this item forward to the IMSG meeting in June 2001.
    Action: Monica

  12. Feedback from the Steering Group

    13. Monica had submitted a report to the Steering Group, which had met during the Cape Town Colloquium. The Steering Group accepted the proposal to re-name the Group from the 'Software Development Group' to the 'Information Management System Group' reflecting the fact that the Group's remit had been expanded.

    It was agreed that more technical expertise was required and Monica agreed to ask for nominations through CCINFO for a technical sub-group (including the updated remit). Issues concerning funding of the new group (e.g. for the convenor of the group to attend IMSG meetings) would be taken after the nominations and decisions about membership have been made.
    Action: Monica

    It was agreed that the IMSG needed international representation and it was agreed that Monica should call for nominations through CCINFO (including the updated remit) from people who lived in countries outside Europe. The person should represent contributors from countries where information technology is not as readily available to contributors as it is in Western Europe, for instance.
    Action: Monica

    Monica had been asked by the Steering Group to provide a budget for 2001/2002. This would include IMSG, RAG, MAG, CritMan Software Advisory Group and the Contact Management Advisory Group. Sonja agreed to detail a budget for MAG and Mike for RAG. Gerd suggested that Georg Koch be invited to participate in IMSG meetings in future, but it was clarified that Gerd's role in the IMSG is primarily as a representative of the Steering Group.
    Action: Monica, Sonja, Mike

  13. Contact Management System

    14. The Contact Management System Group is yet to be established. Discussion will be deferred to the next IMSG meeting in March 2001 and no group will be established until the survey results are available.
    Action: Monica

  14. Any other business

    1. New comments and criticisms system

      2. Mike agreed to suggest to the Executive of the Steering Group that Chris and Iain Chalmers become pre-screeners for the comments and criticisms system.
      Action: Mike

    2. Glossaries

      3. It was agreed that Mike should involve the Consumer Network in the compilation of the single glossary as detailed in item 6.
      Action: Mike

    3. Collaboration web site

      4. Gerd advised that the German Ministry would not fund a full-time person to be responsible for the Collaboration's main web site. At present, the German Cochrane Centre will continue to provide a low level of maintenance on the main site but is unable to provide support for the mirror sites. Gerd will discuss this further with Georg Koch and he will provide guidance for the Publishing Policy Group/Executive Group teleconferences regarding shutting down the mirror sites.
      Action: Gerd

  15. Date of next meeting

    16. Monica will check the date of the next MAG meeting with Sonja and circulate dates accordingly.
    Action: Monica

IMSG minutes | MinMan home

Document Actions