IMS Bulletin #67 (13 February 2008)

Index

1. Change to the way flags will be used to highlight updated reviews in Issue 2, 2008, of The Cochrane Library
2. Tips and checks for quarterly module submission: 0700 (UTC/GMT), Thursday, 21 February 2008
   (a) All CRGs
   (b) Non-RevMan 5 Pilot CRGs
   (c) RevMan 5 Pilot CRGs
3. Reminder: resolving duplicates
4. Question of the week: Should I ask authors to post their signed Licence for Publication form as well as fax it to me?

1. Change to the way flags will be used to highlight updated reviews in Issue 2, 2008, of The Cochrane Library

As mentioned in Lorne Becker's and Monica Kjeldstrom's email message to Adminors on 8 February 2008 about "Flags for RevMan 4 reviews in Issue 2 of The Cochrane Library: submission deadline on 21 February at 7:00", flags used to highlight updated reviews in The Cochrane Library will change in Issue 2, 2008, to reflect the Collaboration's change to the definition of a review update (see Handbook5_Updating_V1.pdf). These changes affect the way that non-RevMan 5 pilot CRGs (i.e., all CRGs who are still using RevMan 4) will need to process reviews that have been updated but whose conclusions have not changed for the forthcoming submission. See Item 2(b), below, for details.

2. Tips and checks for quarterly module submission: 0700 (UTC/GMT), Thursday, 21 February 2008

(a) All CRGs

• Before finalising your quarterly module submission, please remember to read pages 30 and 31 of the Phase 2 User Guide on 'Preparing your quarterly submission to The Cochrane Library'.
• The deadline for the submission is displayed in your local time on the event listing in the Calendar on the Organizer tab in Archie.

(b) Non-RevMan 5 Pilot CRGs

• Related to item 1 above, for the forthcoming submission it is important that you do not change the 'Date of last substantive update' for an updated review if the conclusions of the review have not changed. If you do change the date, the review will be flagged in The Cochrane Library to indicate that the review has not only been ‘Updated’ but also that the 'conclusions have changed', which will be misleading to the reader. Instead, you should publish such reviews in the forthcoming submission with only a change to the 'Date of last minor update' and retain the most recent pre-15 November 2007 date of substantive update. If it is important that the updated review is also given a new citation even though the conclusions have not changed (e.g. the update, without a change to the conclusions, has been prepared by a new team of authors), you can mark it for publication again in the May quarterly module submission when you will be able to convert the review to RevMan 5 and use the What’s New Events in RevMan 5 to mark the review as both ‘Updated’ and ‘New citation: conclusions not changed’ so that it will be correctly flagged in Issue 3, 2008, of The Cochrane Library.
• Please note that the above instructions apply only to full reviews that have been updated but whose conclusions have not changed. You should change the ‘Date of last substantive update’ as usual for updated reviews whose conclusions have changed, as well as for new protocols and new reviews. Please contact your IMS Support person if you have questions about this.

(c) RevMan 5 Pilot CRGs

• Before marking a new protocol for publication, please ensure that there are no Events in 'What's New' and 'History'.
• For new reviews for inclusion in next week's module submission, the 'What's New' should only contain the event: 'Amended: converted to new Review format'.
• Please remember to check the Publication Report in Archie (Click on CRG name > Reports > Publication Report) to ensure that the classification of reviews marked for publication in Issue 2, 2008, of The Cochrane Library will generate the correct flags when the reviews are published in The Cochrane Library.
• Please remember that the Department, Organisation, City and Country for all authors of RevMan 5 reviews marked for inclusion in next week's quarterly submission will be published in Issue 2, 2008.
• You will not be able to use the Review Contact Details Wizard... to republish a review in order to update an Author's or Contact Person's contact details. If it is important to republish a review because of new contact details only, you will have to convert the review to RevMan 5 before marking it for publication. When converting the review to RevMan 5, the latest contact details will be included. We suggest that you inform the Contact Person for the review first so that s/he is aware that they will have to use RevMan 5 when they next edit their review.

3. Reminder: resolving duplicates

Please remember to check that you have no duplicates to resolve in Archie (Tools > Resolve Duplicates...). If an unresolved duplicate is causing you a problem, please contact your IMS Support person for assistance.

4. Question of the week

Question: Should I ask authors to post their signed Licence for Publication forms as well as fax them to me?

Answer: Yes. Wiley-Blackwell's legal department have advised that it is "good practice" for RGCs to retain the original copy of the form. However, if an author faxes the form, but never follows up with the original, the fax is legally binding.