Personal tools
You are here: Home → IMSG → Minutes → SDG minutes, 28 November 1997
 

SDG minutes, 28 November 1997

Minutes of the Software Development Group meeting held at the UK Cochrane Centre on 28 November 1997

Minutes approved on ?

Present: Clive Adams, Mike Clarke, Jon Deeks, Monica Fischer (chair and minutes), Kate Oldfield, Andy Oxman, Mark Starr, Veronica Yank.

In attendance: Rasmus Moustgaard (Nordic Cochrane Centre).

Contents:
Welcome to the new members
Potential conflict of interest
Approval of minutes of last meeting
Action items from last meeting not covered elsewhere
Comments & Criticisms System
RevMan
ModMan for CRGs
Formal contracts between the SDG (acting on behalf of the CCSG) and Update Software, the SDG and the Nordic Cochrane Centre
Database of unpublished data
Specialised Register Development Project (Sherlock)
Contact information (data structure and software)
Next meeting

  1. Welcome to the new members

    2. Kate Oldfield and Jon Deeks.

  2. Potential conflict of interest

    3. Jon perceived a potential conflict of interest regarding his involvement in the development of Descartes; Andy mentioned that he was potentially biased because of his editorial involvement in CCEEP; Mark mentioned that there can be potential conflict of interest in working for both the Collaboration and also his own commercial company, but feels the same could be said about Monica and Veronica (whose centres are responsible for the development of RevMan and the Criticisms Management System, respectively).

    The development of Descartes was discussed at great length. Andy suggested that parts of Descartes could replace MetaView, as it seems that many of the items on the wish list for MetaView will be implemented for Descartes. However, Mark explained that because the underlying design of Descartes is very different from that of MetaView, this would not be possible. Update Software is willing to share the experience it gains from working on Descartes. Algorithms of new statistical methods will be passed on to the Collaboration, but not implementation code for these.

    Mike and Kate did not feel that they had any potential conflicts of interest.

    To improve communication between members of the SDG and between the SDG and other entities, Veronica suggested that modes of communication are set up.
    Action: Veronica, Monica

  3. Approval of minutes of last meeting

    4. The minutes were approved.

  4. Action items from last meeting not covered elsewhere

    5. Minutes: A rota for taking minutes has been set up and circulated via e-mail. However, due to tendinitis in her wrists, Veronica has asked to be excused from this task. The revised rota looks as follows: Clive, Mark, Kate, Mike, Andy, Jon, Monica.

    Cochrane News: It was decided to write a small summary of the consultation on the RevMan 4.0 wish list items that took place during November for publication in Cochrane News. This should also note that items, which involve substantive changes to reviews, will not be included in the implementation plan for RevMan 4.0 without the approval of the CCSG.
    Action: Andy, Monica

    Support system for methodological/statistical queries: Andy had discussed with the Statistical Methods Working Group (SMWG) if a rota could be devised, whereby members monitor the RevMan discussion list and reply to users with methodological/statistical queries. The proposal had not been well received by the SMWG as people were not willing to volunteer to do this task for, say, a month at a time. Instead, it is recommended that reviewers look to their CRG statistician for support.

    Functional and technical specification for each component of the Information Management System: ongoing.
    Action: Mark, Monica

  5. Comments & Criticisms System

    6. Veronica demonstrated the proto-type of the elements of the Comments & Criticisms System that are to be used by reviewers and criticisms editors. Rasmus noted suggestions for changes and will pass these on to Veronica. A copy of the software will be sent to SDG members to be tested during December. Veronica will solicit feedback early in the new year.
    Action: Rasmus, Veronica.

    A beta version of the software should be distributed with RevMan 3.1 if possible. This will allow for testing to take place during April and May 1998. Release of the pilot is planned to be in June.
    Action: Rasmus

    It was agreed that 'author' should be replaced with 'reviewer' throughout CritMan.

    Concern was expressed that the Collaboration does not currently have a system to allow reviewers and criticisms editors to respond to submitted criticisms. A set of guidelines should be drawn up to deal with this. It would be helpful if a flowchart could be included to illustrate the process. It was also noted that the Collaboration should try to publish comments and criticisms as soon as possible after they have been received. Criticisms might not only relate to reviews, but also to the content of CRG modules (e.g. search strategies). The mechanism for dealing with such feedback will need to be addressed.

    An C&C Advisory Group has been established. Originally this had been set up to be independent of the Collaboration, but the SDG recommended that it should be made more biased towards the Collaboration to reflect the involvement of reviewers', review group coordinators' and criticisms editors' in the process. It was recommended that at least 2 review group coordinators and 2 criticisms editors should become members of the group. Veronica will bring feedback from the C&C Advisory Group to the SDG.
    The mandate of the Advisory Group needs to be more clearly defined.
    Action: Veronica

    Comments and criticisms need be stored in such a way that different versions of a review can be distinquised. There will, therefore, be implications when review titles, review numbers, reviewer IDs, etc. are changed. One idea would be to be have an ancestor ID as part of the review ID. Mark will, with the help of others, prepare a proposal on how to take this forward.
    Action: Mark

    The issue of how to deal with comments and criticisms submitted in languages other than English needs to be addressed.

    On behalf of the San Francisco Center, Veronica expressed thanks to the Nordic Centre, especially to Rasmus Moustgaard, for help and collaboration in developing the CritMan prototype.

  6. RevMan

    7. Andy summarised the discussion from the RevMan Advisory Group meeting held the previous day. Special attention had been given to issues relating to Metaview, statistics, implementation, and the planning process for RevMan 4.0. Jon was asked to discuss with the Statistical Methods Working Group implemention of the following statistical methods: (Andy, please provide list.) Feedback should be sent to the SDG by the end of January.
    Action: Jon

    An implementation sub-group were set up to discuss implementation issues for RevMan 4.0. Membership is as follows: Jon Deeks, Monica Fischer, Rasmus Moustgaard, Mark Starr.
    Issues to address in the near future include: Win95 vs Win 3.1 (32 bit systems vs 16 bit systems), FoxPro vs other, Metaview vs other, Mac and PC versions, decide which wish list items have to be made mandatory. The implementation group should prepare a set of recommendations and circulate these for feedback in time for the CCSG meeting on 16-17 February.

    Part of the planning process for RevMan 4.0 should include how to transfer reviews from 3.1 to 4.0.

    It was agreed that standard formats for citations and ongoing trials should be devised as soon as possible. Mike and Mark were asked to determine what these should be. CRGs should be informed of the format to be used in RevMan 4.0 so that reviewers can begin to use them.
    Action: Mike, Mark

    Mike mentioned a problem in the current version of Metaview relating to the display of previously published IPD reviews. The only display options currently available use log scales but some IPD reviews have used linear scales. The lack of a display option for linear scales is not only a problem for IPD reviews as other reviewers and users may also wish to display results in this way. This and other wish list items generated by the beta-testing of the IPD version of RevMan/MetaView need to be included in the plan for RevMan 4.0, if it is not possible to implement these for RevMan 3.1 (in Metaview 3.1). The items were listed in the beta-testing report prepared by Mike and Jayne Tierney of the IPD Methods Working Group which was distributed on 19 November.

  7. ModMan for CRGs

    8. Kate is the new convenor of the ModMan Advisory Group, and two new members of the group have been enrolled: Graham Mowatt (EPOC) and Leanne Roberts (Schizophrenia). Both are CRG co-ordinators. It was recommended that membership be expanded to include one or two co-ordinating editors.
    Action: Kate

    Kate asked for a definition of the mandate of the ModMan Advisory Group. Monica will prepare drafts for all the advisory groups.
    Action: Monica

    A set of new CRG module headings has been approved by the CCSG. Paul Jones has agreed to write guidelines for implementing these new headings in consultation with Kate Oldfield. It was agreed that CRGs should be given as much notice as possible about the new headings and on how to implement them (at least 6 months if possible). Monica will send the results of Peter Gøtzsche's questionnaire on the scope and topic lists of CRGs to Paul Jones.
    Action: Kate, Monica

    It was decided to separate RevMan from ModMan. This will make it easier to maintain the two programs independently of each other. Update Software will prepare a proposal for a new 'ModMan for CRGs' in collaboration with the ModMan Advisory Group.
    Action: Mark/Lois Sims, Kate

    Mark, Kate and Monica should propose timings for adopting the new headings and the new software. Monica should obtain approval from the CCSG, after which CRGs should be informed about the plans.
    Action: Mark, Kate, Monica

  8. Formal contracts between the SDG (acting on behalf of the CCSG) and Update Software, the SDG and the Nordic Cochrane Centre

    9. Letters of agreement will be prepared when the implementation plan for RevMan 4.0 is available.
    Action: Monica

  9. Database of unpublished data

    10. A newly employed information technologist at the Health Services Research Unit, Folkehelsa, Oslo will work with Andy to prepare a proposal for implementing this database. Anyone who wants to be involved should contact Andy.

  10. Specialised Register Development Project (Sherlock)

    11. A consultation among Sherlock Advisory Group members is taking place to solicit feedback on the project plan so far. A meeting of the Advisory Group might be convened sometime in March or April (depending on the feedback from this consultation).

  11. Contact information (data structure and software)

    12. Not discussed.

  12. Next meeting

    13. The next meeting should be held back to back with the next RAG meeting. Andy will consult with the SDG about possible dates before these are published to the RAG members. Veronica asked if 21 April could be avoided.
    Action: Andy

IMSG minutes | MinMan home

Document Actions