IMS Bulletin #58 (3 August 2007)

Index

1. Next Archie deployment: 8 August 2007
2. RevMan 5 beta
3. RevMan 5 rollout and implementation strategy and FAQ
4. Reminders
   • (a) Relationship between Document roles and Entity roles in Archie
   • (b) Person Report
5. Message from Dave Booker, Web Development Manager
6. Question of the week: How can I use Archie to help me identify our CRG's out-of-date reviews?

1. Next Archie deployment: 8 August 2007

The next deployment of Archie (version 1.16) is scheduled for Wednesday, 8 August 2007. You will receive a system message in Archie when the deployment has been made. Please remember to read the What's New (using Help > What's New), which will be updated when the deployment takes place, for a description of the bug fixes and new features. New features in next week's deployment will include:

Change to folder structure in Resources: Archie currently has three folders (People, Documents and Reviews) under each CRG name in Resources. The Documents folder will be replaced by three new folders: Module (which will contain the CRG's module text); Website (for access to the Entity Website Builder); Files (for other CRG files).
> <i><b>New Report - Out-of-date Reviews:<i> This new report (right-click your CRG's name and choose Reports > Out-of-date Reviews) will provide you with a list of all your CRG's reviews which, on the day you run the report, are out of date or will be out of date in the next four issues of The Cochrane Library. For the purposes of this report, a review is considered out of date if all of the following dates from the RevMan file are more than two years old: last substantive update, new studies sought but not found, and new studies found and included or excluded.
> <i><b>New Report - Authors losing subscription:<i> This new report (right-click your CRG's name and choose Reports > Authors losing subscription) will provide you with a list of the names of your CRG authors who will lose their complimentary subscription to The Cochrane Library within the next four issues because they do not have at least one up-to-date review published.
> <i><b>New fields added to the validation report: <i>New fields have been added to the validation reports (right-click your CRG's name and choose Reports > Validate All Reviews or right-click the title of an individual review and choose Reports > Validate) to reflect updated publication policy and guidance.
> <i><b>Removed 'Remember my password'<i> from the opening screen. New 'Forgot your password' added to the opening screen so that users can ask for their password if they have forgotten it.

There will not be another deployment for some time because of the need to prepare Archie for the release of RevMan 5.

2. RevMan 5 beta

All RevMan 5 planned functionality has now been completed and the software has been released for beta testing. For details, see http://www.cc-ims.net/RevMan/RevMan5/RevMan5beta!.

3. RevMan 5 rollout and implementation strategy and FAQ

We have drafted a detailed RevMan 5 rollout and implementation strategy document which is currently with the CC Steering Group for comment. We are also preparing a RevMan 5 FAQ in response to questions we have received from RGCs about the release of RevMan 5. Both documents will be announced through the IMS Bulletin and posted on the IMS website as soon as they have been finalised.

4. Reminders

(a) Relationship between Document roles and Entity roles in Archie
> At the moment, Entity roles are NOT co-ordinated with Document roles automatically in Archie. When you check a Review into Archie, Archie will create a Document role for all authors selected as 'Reviewers' in RevMan even if the person does not have the Entity role 'Author' with your CRG. However, It is important to note that Archie will not automatically update the person's Entity role in their Properties if the person currently doesn't have the Entity role 'Author' with your CRG. In such cases, you will have to add the 'Author' role with your CRG to the person's record. <br>

For more details, please see IMS Bulletin No. 30 at http://www.cc-ims.net/Projects/newIMS/Bulletins/bulletin-no.30-27-january-06.htm .

5. Message from Dave Booker, Web Development Manager

Are you staying informed about the Entity Website Builder?

Be sure you or your entity's webmaster gets announcemments about the latest news and features of the Entity Website Builder. Join the EntityWebMasters email list and receive our tip of the month and other information. See http://lists.cochrane.org/mailman/listinfo/entitywebmasters. Questions? Contact web@cochrane.org.

Want parts of your module in your entity's public website, but you are not using the Entity Website Builder?

No problem! Visit http://cochrane.org/entitysites/snippets/module.php. for the code, along with other nifty 'snippets' for your site. Questions? Contact Contact web@cochrane.org.

6. Question of the week

Question: How can I use Archie to help me identify our CRG's out-of-date reviews?

Answer: There are currently two ways of identifying your out-of-date reviews, apart from running the new report described in item 1 above.

(i) If the relevant date fields in the RevMan files have been completed and used consistently, you can use the Advanced Search feature in Archie - see the pull-down list of options in Advanced Search for Documents in Archie, which includes the following: 'Protocol First Published'; 'Review First Published'; 'Last Minor Update'; e.t.c. (all of which can be combined with 'Publication Status'). You can then create a table of your out-of-date reviews using Tools > Export and Labels... which will open the Export Wizard to allow you to create and export a table customised for your needs.

(ii) If you have been completing the Next Stage Expected field in Archie for all reviews (on the Advanced tab of the review's Properties), you can use the Advanced Search in Archie to search for specific issues of The Cochrane Library in which the review or protocol should have been published or next published. For example, if the Next Stage Expected field for all reviews has been completed and kept up to date, you could run a search today for all reviews for which you expected the next version to be published in Issue 4, 2007. You could then check this against the list of reviews currently in your editorial process to identify reviews that are running behind schedule. Similarly, you could search for reviews with a Next Stage Expected sometime in the past (e.g., Issue 1, 2, or 3, 2007) to identify out-of-date reviews.