Personal tools
You are here: Home → IMSG → Minutes → SDG minutes, 3 February 2000
 

SDG minutes, 3 February 2000

Minutes of the Software Development Group's special meeting held at UK Cochrane Centre on 3 February 2000

Minutes approved on 5 April 2000

Present: Mike Clarke (chair and minutes), Mandy Collingwood (as stand-in for Sonja Henderson), Monica Fischer (Convenor), Julian Higgins, Mark Starr, Phil Wiffen

Apologies: Chris Cates, Sonja Henderson, Peter Langhorne

In attendance: Rasmus Moustgaard

Contents:
Welcome and apologies
Conflict of interest
Future development of Information Management System
Report to the Steering Group
Next meeting

  1. Welcome and apologies

    2. Julian was welcomed to his first meeting of the SDG as the new statistical representative. Mandy was welcomed as a stand-in for Sonja (representing the ModMan Advisory Group).

  2. Conflict of interest

    3. No changes to their previous statements were noted by those who had attended previous meetings (see below). Mike had agreed to chair the meeting because of Monica’s conflict of interest. Julian and Mandy were not aware of conflicts of interest.

    • Mike Clarke: as editor of the Reviewers’ Handbook
    • Mandy Collingwood: none known
    • Monica Fischer: involvement in the development of RevMan; funding of software development at the NCC dependent on decisions made by the SDG
    • Julian Higgins: none known
    • Mark Starr: involvement in development of commercial software, e.g. Metaxis; as publisher of the Cochrane Library
    • Phil Wiffen: none known

  3. Future development of Information Management System

    4. Monica clarified that the current proposal was for possible sources of funding only. A more detailed document would be prepared for those who expressed an interest. There were concerns that potential funders might steer the development of the Information Management System in a way that was not wanted by the Collaboration. Although it was recognised that it would be difficult to refuse any funding, it was agreed that the final decision on what is developed needs to rest with the Collaboration and, ultimately, with the Steering Group.

    It was agreed that approaching funders before doing a needs assessment was the reverse of good practice. However, because it might take more than one year to prepare a sufficiently detailed statement of needs it was agreed that the proposed sequence should be followed. The needs assessment will start after the April meetings of the RAG and SDG. In the meantime, alternative visions to that in the current proposal should be sought so that these could be included in the needs assessment. Mark will circulate a list of such alternatives to the SDG in the next week. This list could then be revised for circulation to the RAG following the consultation period on the draft background document that Monica will prepare.

    The recommendations of the RAG were accepted with regard to the revision and use of the initial proposal, and of the fuller, more detailed, document. An important point to bear in mind was that the proposed solution was just one of several options. It should be stressed that software development was a Collaboration initiative, not just one by the Nordic Cochrane Centre or the current Software Development Group (given its exclusively Northern European membership). The draft for the fuller document should be passed to the CENTRAL/CCTR Advisory Group for information and it should be made clear that it does not seek funding for the development of CENTRAL but simply for the integration of CENTRAL with other aspects of reference and study management within the Collaboration.

    It was agreed that monitoring of the development process would be very important. It was agreed that there should be only one group responsible for overseeing this (a project board) and, if this will be the Software Development Group, this would need to be expanded. There should also be a project team reporting to the project board, which would include project management expertise and software expertise. The expansion of the Software Development Group should bring in representatives of users of RevMan from outside of the UK and northern Europe. This could be done by establishing the equivalent of RevMan Advisory Groups in other parts of the world and having their convenors join the SDG. The three parts of the world where such groups might be most needed are South-East Asia including Australasia, South America (perhaps using the Ibero-America group) and South Africa. It was recognised that funding would be needed to facilitate this expansion of the SDG and that the funding proposal should include this. However, it was agreed that regardless of the current proposal it would be helpful if non-UK RevMan Advisory Groups could be established. It was agreed that non-UK advice on issues related to ModMan should be sought by an expansion of the current ModMan Advisory Group, rather than by establishing additional MAG. It was also agreed that there was no need to expand the representation for statistics or editors.

    Monica noted that she has had some discussions with the Campbell Collaboration about software development but there had been no specific discussions about a shared funding application for development of the Information Management System. However, it is expected that discussions will take place to ensure that the Collaborations learn from each other and share software as appropriate. If the Campbell Collaboration wish to use RevMan, they should contribute to its support.

  4. Report to the Steering Group

    5. The content of a report from the SDG to the Steering Group was discussed. It was agreed that this should:

    • Ask the CCSG to give high priority to setting aside funding to allow for continued support of RevMan from 1 January 2001 if external funding is not available. This funding should be sufficient to provide support to users of the current software and to explore possibilities for future development. This would require 1.5 FTE and approximately £25,000 to provide the Nordic Cochrane Centre with adequate Internet access to pilot the development of an integrated, Internet-based system to minimise the duplication of effort involved in storing the same information independently.
    • Note that a delivery date for RevMan/MetaView 4.1 cannot be set until the beta-testing is complete; and that the date of the main beta-testing is dependant on the results of the initial beta-testing of the statistical software. However, it is highly unlikely that MetaView 4.1 could be used for issue 3, 2000 of The Cochrane Library.
    • Note that Update Software will pass responsibility for the statistical aspects of RevMan to the Nordic Cochrane Centre when the live version of MetaView 4.1 has been delivered.
    • Ask the CCSG to follow the advice of the Software Development Group, support the current proposal for the development of the Information Management System as one of the options for this development and formally adopt such developments as a Cochrane Collaboration initiative.
    • Note that a needs assessment is being planned in order to develop a statement of needs for the future development of the Information Management System.
    • Ask the CCSG to recommend to the Centre Directors that additional RevMan Advisory Groups should be established to cover users of RevMan who are unable to participate in the current RAG because of their location.

  5. Next meeting

    6. The date of the next meeting of the SDG will be set by email. It was suggested that if the RAG met on Wednesday 5 April, the SDG could meet that afternoon and again the following morning. The meeting would immediately precede the Review Group Coordinator/Trial Search Coordinator meetings at the UK Cochrane Contributors meeting.

IMSG minutes | MinMan home

Document Actions