The World Health Organization defines an infodemic as “overabundance of information – some accurate and some not – that occurs during an epidemic. It can lead to confusion and ultimately mistrust in governments and public health response”. This has been a particular challenge during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Cochrane US Senior Officer, Tiffany Duque joined The Eco Well on a webinar to talk about the importance of credible information and the infodemic. She also covered what Cochrane does and how people can get involved. 

• Join Cochrane
• What is Cochrane?
• What are systematic reviews?
• Understanding health evidence in COVID-19 times

Dear Community members and friends,

Context
So much happens in a year. Last year, Cochrane responded quickly to the pandemic with rapid, living reviews – sharing the best evidence on key interventions and diagnostic tests to support the world in tackling this unprecedented challenge.  We made all of our Coronavirus (COVID-19) resources freely available, open access – which they remain today, including our COVID-19 Study Register which now has references to well over 100,000 studies. Our work has never been more important or relevant.

We find ourselves still living with the pandemic in 2021. The rollout of vaccines has been a great global achievement, but exacerbated health inequalities as the global north rolled out vaccinations, and the global south has been left behind.

2021 was the year we committed to full Open Access publishing by 2025, as part of making our evidence accessible, usable, and available to all. This is a vital step towards achieving our vision of “better health for all people”, and also reflects the fantastic drive towards open access across the publishing sector and particularly for peer reviewed research – core to our work and impact. This will have implications for our income and business model, and so we plan to diversify our income streams and our products.  

We were fortunate this year to receive over £17m funding from global funders to Cochrane groups globally. We look forward to continuing those relationships and working with them to do even more to improve health for all people. 

Transformation
In this context, we have launched a programme of transformation to ensure we maintain our relevance and pre-eminence into the future. Our ‘Strategy for Change’ describes our priorities for working in a changing environment through to 2023, building on the insight and feedback of the extraordinary Cochrane community, and the experience of the pandemic.   Cochrane Reviews are recognized internationally as a gold standard for high-quality, trusted health information. We do not accept commercial or conflicted funding, which is vital for us to generate authoritative and reliable information, working freely, unconstrained by commercial and financial interests. This makes it even more important that we adapt and change, and get fit for the future so we can not only survive but thrive into the future.

As part of that transformation programme, over the last three months the Cochrane community has discussed:

• How we can remain true to our values while adapting to challenges;
• How we remain the standard-setter for evidence synthesis; and
• How to change to ensure we produce timely, high-quality evidence that serves the different users of evidence.

Achievements
2021 has been another year of exceptional achievement for Cochrane.  Highlights include:

• The Impact Factor for the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews grew to 9.266.
• In 2021, 3100 authors prepared new and updated reviews by summarising evidence from over 10,000 included studies
• We made statements at two World Health Assemblies - advocating for the need of evidence synthesis in the response to COVID-19
• We hosted a major event - Cochrane Convenes: Preparing for and responding to global health emergencies: what have we learnt from COVID-19
• The Cochrane Library now has a total of 17 national and regional licenses, representing immediate full access for more than 500 million people.

See more of our achievements

Plans for 2022
Your contributions shaped the strategy for change and have offered valuable insights as we consider the future. They ensure we can together build a sustainable future and remain at the forefront of evidence synthesis. We will now be determining the direction of travel for how we produce evidence synthesis in future, and progressing implementation of this multi-year change programme. We continue to improve our process, structures and systems for evidence production to be able to respond quickly and reliably to user-needs, whilst demonstrating good research and publishing practice.

In 2022, we will be seeking new ways to generate income and be sustainable in the context of our commitment to Open Access, funding challenges and competition.  We will be recruiting a new Chief Executive, and a Director of Development to lead on fundraising.

We are hugely proud of our Cochrane Community whose collective energy, drive and enthusiasm make such a difference. Collaboration is our watchword and we work together to achieve our goals bringing together diverse interests, expertise, and geographies.  While there are challenges, we know it is more important than ever to share our evidence and contribute to a world of better health for all people.

Thank you for all you do. We are hugely optimistic about the future, and look forward to seeing you and working with you in 2022 and beyond.  All the best for the holidays and new year.

Tracey Howe, Co-chair

Catherine Marshall, Co-chair

Karla Soares-Weiser, Editor-in-Chief

Judith Brodie, Interim Chief Executive

Dru Riddle is an Associate Professor of Professional Practice at Texas Christian University, Co-chair of the  Cochrane US Network Executive, was a moderator and panel member of the recent Cochrane Convenes.  Drawing on experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic, the inaugural Cochrane Convenes brought together leaders across the world to explore and then recommend the changes needed in evidence synthesis to prepare for and respond to future global health emergencies. He recently spoke to Becker’s Healthcare Podcast which features interviews and conversations with the latest in thought leadership in the healthcare industry. The episode discusses his advice to listen more than you talk, influencing without controlling, Cochrane Convenes and more.

• Visit the Cochrane US website
• Learn more about Cochrane Convenes

Real-time reviews of research findings could help policymakers address global crises such as COVID-19, says this article published  in Nature. Living evidence was first developed by Cochrane and is an important recommendation that came out of the recent Cochrane Convenes meetings which looked at how we can better prepare for future health emergencies.

According to scientists writing in the peer-reviewed journal Nature, policy missteps will continue to overshadow the global response to COVID-19 because policymakers are overwhelmed with rapidly shifting research evidence. Faced with new challenges such as the Omicron variant, decision-makers can’t keep up with the flood of new research studies when drawing up policy. This results in muddled strategies, erodes trust in science and fuels controversy, according to the authors.

They are now urging countries to adopt a new scientific approach that summarizes scientific research in near real time.

This system called ‘living evidence’ produces rigorous and ready-to-go summaries of all relevant scientific research, and keeps them up to date by rapidly incorporating new research findings.

Policy makers and clinicians can draw on a form of scientific knowledge that is both rigorous and trustworthy, and includes all the latest science – something that has not been available previously.

Living evidence was first developed by researchers from Cochrane, a leading producer of scientific evidence on health topics, and tested by the Australian Stroke Foundation in their national clinical guidelines as a way to cut the time lag between research being published and implementation of new treatments. Cochrane defines living systematic reviews (LSRs) as ones which are  continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. There are now 7 LSRs in the Cochrane Library and 3 LSR protocols. Learn more about Cochrane's Living systematic reviews. 

Recently Cochrane hosted  Cochrane Convenes; an online event, co-sponsored by WHO, and co-organised with COVID-END (COVID-19 Evidence Network to support Decision-making).  It brought together leaders across the world to explore and then recommend the changes needed in evidence synthesis to prepare for and respond to future global health emergencies. Prioritizing and supporting the creation and use of living evidence was a recommendation that came out as part of these meetings. Learn more about Cochrane Convenes. 

“Decisions relevant to global challenges must be informed by the best available evidence,” says lead author Julian Elliott from the Australian Living Evidence Consortium at Cochrane Australia, Monash University, Melbourne.

“Otherwise, policy missteps with every new challenge of the pandemic, such as the rise of the Omicron variant, will lead to unnecessary and untold health, social and economic impacts. It should no longer be acceptable for evidence to be out of date, biased or selective. Without trustworthy and up-to-date research reviews, the world risks making ill-informed decisions and wasting resources. We call on policymakers as well as researchers in every scientific field, and their funders, to adopt the living-evidence model. Science doesn’t stand still, neither should its translation into action.”

Typically, national policies and guidelines draw on formal summaries of research. Known as systematic reviews, scientists combine evidence from individual studies then analyse the data to calculate an overall result. Used since the 1980s, this approach is aimed at creating a clear understanding of the scientific knowledge available. Systematic review has been the basis for high-impact decision-making not only in health but also in other fields such as education and poverty eradication.    

However, the authors say these reviews are often of poor quality, duplicative and out of date, especially when there is ‘a flood of new research’ such as in the current pandemic.

The authors highlight the drug remdesivir which ‘weak but promising’ data suggested could treat COVID-19. In 2020, 30 systematic reviews were produced to assess remdesivir’s efficacy. Yet many were outdated before they were published because they omitted ‘recently published primary studies’, according to the authors. Read Cochrane's living systematic review on Remdesivir.

Living evidence overcomes these issues. Researchers continuously identify new studies by monitoring databases of the latest journal publications and other digital collections, often enabled by artificial intelligence and other technologies.

Dr Jeremy Grimshaw, co-author and co-lead of COVID-END (a global umbrella organization of evidence synthesis groups, including Cochrane ), argues that living evidence has been essential to addressing COVID-19 and similar models should be adopted to address other global challenges.
 
“Citizens, practitioners, managers and policy makers need trustworthy living evidence to address day-by-day decisions and ongoing challenges such as antimicrobial resistance. The Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges will be reporting early next year with further recommendations about how we can do this.”

Living evidence can help tackle some of the world’s greatest challenges such as climate change. Prof Jan Minx, co-author and a co-chair of the Campbell Climate Solutions Coordinating Group, says that “current knowledge on what solutions work to solve the climate crisis is still patchy. We need to respond quickly and cannot afford many mistakes. There is no alternative to an agile approach to evidence-based policy that can deal with the flood of research and rigorously inform the thousands of decisions required to decarbonize the world economy.  Using living evidence in the field of climate science is critical to meet this challenge”.

You can read the full Nature Comment here: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03690-1

The authors

• Julian Elliott directs the Australian Living Evidence Consortium, based at Cochrane Australia, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia and is chief executive of Covidence.org.
• Rebecca Lawrence is managing director, F1000 Research, London, UK, is a Board Member of Open Research Central and was a member of the Open Science Policy Platform of the European Commission.
• Jan C. Minx heads the Working Group on Applied Sustainability Science at the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change; is professor for climate change and public policy at the Priestley International Centre for Climate at the University of Leeds, UK; and co-chairs the Campbell Coordinating Group on Climate Solutions.
• Olufemi T. Oladapo is unit head, Maternal and Perinatal Health, UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
• Philippe Ravaud is director of the Centre for Epidemiological and Statistical Research Sorbonne Paris Cité (CRESS-UMR1153), Inserm/Université de Paris, and director of the Centre for Clinical Epidemiology, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Paris, France.
• Britta Tendal is director of the Department of Evidence-Based Medicine, Danish Health Authority, Copenhagen, Denmark.
• James Thomas is professor of social research and policy, and deputy director, Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), UCL Social Research Institute, Institute of Education, University College London, UK.
• Tari Turner is Associate Professor, Cochrane Australia, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University; Director, National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce.
• Per Olav Vandvik is professor at the Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Norway; a researcher at the Norwegian Knowledge Centre; and chief executive of the MAGIC Foundation.
• Jeremy M. Grimshaw is senior scientist, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; and full professor, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa.

Job Title: Evaluator– Clinical Innovation Adoption Programme

Organisation:  Oxford Academic Health Science Network

Salary: £47,126 to £53k

Workload: 0.8 to 1 WTE

Deadline: Apply before 17 January

The Clinical Innovation Adoption Programme  works with all the Network’s stakeholders and partners to deliver improved health and increased economic growth across the region. Success in this role will be defined by successful delivery of evaluations of projects from the Clinical Innovation Adoption Programme, working with the NHS, the life sciences industries, academics and other stakeholders. Evaluations include projects that are being delivered from our NHSEI and Office of Life Science commissions, and additionally won bids.

This post requires the individual to have an excellent understanding of methodologies that could be applied in real world situations. The evaluation outputs must provide sufficient rigour so that the evidence can be used for further quality improvement opportunities and scale up/roll out across the NHS. 

The successful candidate should have the required skills for evaluation delivery which includes design, ability to lead on workshops, judgement on appropriate methods, knowledge and experience of conducting literature searches, qualitative interviews, surveys focus groups and quantitative analysis (awareness).

The post-holder will work alongside CIA Project Managers and with selected innovators to evaluate impact. Innovations include technologies (AI, digital or medical devices), drugs and new models of working. Innovations within this programme are either nearly ready, ready, or in the process of being deployed.

• Expressions of interest can be emailed to  Tracey Marriott, Director of Clinical Innovation Adoption at tracey.marriott@oxfordahsn.org

Location: Flexible location (remote working) in the UK.
Specifications: Permanent contract.
Hours: Full-time week (flexible working considered) – 37.5 hours.
Salary: £40,000 per annum.
Application Closing Date: Monday 31 January (Midnight GMT).

This role is an exciting opportunity to use your problem-solving skills to make a difference in the field of health care research.  

As the Cochrane Library Business Analyst, you will gather, investigate, validate, and document business requirements using workshops, user research, user cases, and task and workflow analysis. You will ensure requirements are sufficiently detailed, reviewed, signed off, and kept up-to-date and are fully traceable. You will create and manage functional specifications, and contribute to identifying and validating appropriate solutions to support business objectives.

You will act as a key liaison between the relevant Cochrane stakeholders and departments, our publisher and their outsourced development vendor, to gather requirements, ensure that technical needs are well defined, that feature implementation goals are met, and that go-to-market activities are successfully performed.

Cochrane is a global, independent network of health practitioners, researchers, patient advocates and others, responding to the challenge of making vast amounts of research evidence useful for informing decisions about health. We do this by synthesizing research findings to produce the best available evidence on what can work, what might harm and where more research is needed. Our work is recognised as the international gold standard for high quality, trusted information.

• For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here. 
• The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples. Note that we will assess applications as they are received, and therefore may fill the post before the deadline.
• Deadline for applications: Monday 31 January (Midnight GMT).

Cochrane is made up of 11,000 members and over 67,000 supporters come from more than 130 countries, worldwide. Our volunteers and contributors are researchers, health professionals, patients, carers, people passionate about improving health outcomes for everyone, everywhere.

Getting involved in Cochrane’s work means becoming part of a global community. The Cochrane International Mobility programme connects successful applicants with a placement in a host Cochrane Group, learning more about the production, use, and knowledge translation of Cochrane reviews. The prgramme offers opportunities for learning and training not only for participants but also for host staff.

In this series, we profile those that have participated in the Cochrane International Mobility Program and learn more about their experiences.

Name: Lea Styrmisdóttir
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
CIM location: Cochrane Argentina

How did you first learn about Cochrane?
I first learned about Cochrane during my medical studies, the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules are an integrated part of the medical programme in Lund, Sweden.

What was your experience with Cochrane International Mobility?
I did a virtual exchange with Cochrane Argentina. I was part of writing a review on the effect of palivizumab, a monoclonal antibody, on respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in children. This was also the subject of my master thesis. Through CIM, I took part in different webinars and trainings, learning more about the Cochrane methodology. I had a great experience with CIM and I am glad I had the opportunity to work with such driven and talented people.

What are you doing now in relation to your Cochrane International Mobility experience?
I presented my master thesis in January earlier this year. The review about palivizumab for RSV infection was recently published. I have continued my work at Cochrane Sweden after CIM and I am now working on another review about systemic opioid regimens for postoperative pain in neonates together with two other Cochrane members that previously have been a part of the CIM programme. I am also hoping to do more work with Cochrane in the future.  

Do you have any words of advice to anyone considering a Cochrane International Mobility experience?
If you are interested in evidence-based medicine and want to get to know other researchers around the world, you should definitely take part in the CIM programme!

• Full-time, Part-time or  flexible arrangement
• Remote work with at least a 4 hour workday crossover with the AEST timezone
• AUD$60,000 - $80,000 full time base salary (or paid pro rata for parttime)

Launched in 2014, Covidence is a world leading SAAS platform that enables health and science research teams to rapidly synthesise and uncover actionable insights from the mountains of existing research in the world. Their mission is to dramatically improve lives by changing the way the world creates and uses knowledge. 

They are seeking to grow their global user engagement and support team with a Community Manager based in the Asia-Pacific region. To excel as a Community Manager, you will have excellent interpersonal skills, strong written and verbal communication skills, and be highly organised with proven ability to appropriately prioritise tasks and deliver on time in a busy environment. You will have demonstrated capacity to work independently and with others in a globally distributed team. And importantly, you’ll have proven ability working with online technologies and social media.

• Visit the Covidence website
• View the full job ad
• Apply for the position

Main area: Editorial; Evidence Based Medicine; Research
Grade: NHS AfC: Band 7
Contract: Fixed term: 9 months (The length of the contract is dependent on the start date; this is a maternity cover position, with the post-holder returning in October 2022)
Hours: Full time - 37.5 hours per week (Part-time hours considered)
Job ref: 321-CORP-MAED-B7
Site: Home-based
Salary: £40,057 - £45,839 Dependent on experience
Closing date: 04/01/2022 23:59
Interview date: 06/01/2022

We would like to invite applications for a Managing Editor (maternity cover) with the Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Review Group (PaPaS CRG). A Managing Editor is responsible for the day-to-day operational management of the CRG editorial base. The ideal applicant will be educated to degree level or above, with managerial, administrative, scientific or publishing experience or equivalent, along with excellent organisational and communication skills. Knowledge of scientific and medical terminology and evidence-based health care is desirable. Familiarity with clinical trials, systematic reviews, or Cochrane would be welcomed.

• This is a full-time remote (home-working) role until October 2022; part-time hours can be considered.
• The closing date is 06 January.
• For more information and how to apply, please visit this page

New online learning is now freely available about Consumer involvement in Cochrane as part of its Evidence Essentials modules.

Cochrane is delighted to announce the launch of a new module Consumer involvement in Cochrane as part of its  Cochrane Evidence Essentials free, online learning.

Written from the perspective of a healthcare consumer and co-created with patients and carers, this learning is for anyone interested in finding out about getting involved in Cochrane, as a patient, a carer, or member of the public (what Cochrane calls consumers).

Topics included in the module include a 'Welcome to Cochrane' section, a description of the different ways to contribute to systematic reviews evidence and to Cochrane, and how to sign-up to get involved. The learning is interactive, with quizzes, animations, and ways to check your knowledge.

This module is the latest in Cochrane’s “Evidence Essentials” that gives an introduction to Evidence Based Medicine, clinical trials, systematic reviews and how to use evidence when making decisions about your health. The modules have been visited over 35,000 times since their launch, and have now been translated into German and Russian, with other languages to follow.

Cochrane’s Consumer Engagement Officer, Richard Morley welcomed the launch of the latest module:

“Cochrane has a long history and commitment to involvement and engagement as an essential part of producing trusted evidence that can be used in making informed decisions and improving health. This latest module in the Evidence Essentials series has been co-designed and produced with consumers and puts into one exciting place all the information you might want to know in order to be a part of our growing global community.”

Lynn Laidlaw and Sally Crowe who facilitated the engagement process and wrote the initial content based on feedback from patients, carers and public, said: “We are very pleased that the final version launched today represents much of the discussion over two workshops.  We feel that this module is more attuned to people that may never have heard of Cochrane before, but are curious and potentially interested in getting involved in the production of Cochrane evidence”.

There are five interactive modules that make up Evidence Essentials: an introduction to Evidence Based Medicine, Randomized Controlled Trials, Introduction to systematic reviews, Understanding and using systematic reviews and the latest, Consumer involvement in Cochrane. The learning journey is led by Eleni, a fictional consumer.

• Modules are free to use, with a Cochrane account and are found at https://training.cochrane.org/essentials

A World Health Assembly special session to discuss the development of a potential new global health treaty to support pandemic preparedness is taking place this week (29 November – 1 December).

The World Health Assembly is the decision-making body of the World Health Organization (WHO) and is attended by representatives of all Member States.

Our statement, which reiterates the reflections from the recent Cochrane Convenes meetings about the COVID-19 evidence response, is below:

Cochrane is a global advocate for evidence-informed health and health care. Our mission is to produce relevant and timely synthesized evidence.

Building and strengthening systems which are adequately prepared to produce and use reliable, relevant and timely evidence will be crucial to respond to future global health emergencies.

Cochrane recently hosted a convening of high-level stakeholders, co-sponsored by WHO, to reflect on the role of evidence in the COVID-19 pandemic and develop recommendations for future preparedness. The evidence response has been inequitable; our research methods, tools and processes have been pushed to their limits; and we have struggled to communicate uncertainties and gain trust.

Therefore, we urge Member States to ensure that any convention or instrument developed during this process prioritise the production, use and communication of evidence – and is accompanied by sustained investment in the systems and people who perform this vital role.

Our recommendations echo the WHO Evidence-informed Policy Network call for action, which we proudly support.

• Follow the meeting

Location: Flexible location (remote working) – contract type dependent on location.
Specifications: 1 Jan to 31 July 2022. Fixed-term contract if successful applicant based in UK, Germany or Denmark. Consultancy contract in other locations.
Hours: Part time 22.5 hours per week.
Salary: £30,000 per annum (pro-rated to part time).
Application Closing Date: Monday 13 December (Midnight GMT).

This role is an exciting opportunity to use your communication and problem-solving skills to make a difference in the field of health care research.  

The Cochrane Support team is the first point of contact for the international Cochrane community. We provide technical and user support to Cochrane editorial teams and review authors; and handle enquiries from members of the public about Cochrane’s work.

We pride ourselves on our timely and coordinated support service, covering a broad range of areas including Cochrane review-writing software, editorial processing and publication, Cochrane Account login, membership, training, and volunteering opportunities.

The team works closely with Cochrane’s Central Editorial Service and Editorial and Methods Department, as well as IT Services, to ensure accurate, consistent responses to queries on Cochrane technology, policies and methods.

Cochrane is a global, independent network of health practitioners, researchers, patient advocates and others, responding to the challenge of making vast amounts of research evidence useful for informing decisions about health. We do this by synthesizing research findings to produce the best available evidence on what can work, what might harm and where more research is needed. Our work is recognised as the international gold standard for high quality, trusted information.

For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here.  The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples. Note that we will assess applications as they are received, and therefore may fill the post before the deadline.

• Deadline for applications: Monday 13 December (12 midnight GMT)
• Interviews to be held on: w/c 20 December 2021 (times to be confirmed)
• If you have any questions or would like an informal chat about the role please contact Lorna via recruitment@cochrane.org
• Apply here

Cochrane is made up of 11,000 members and over 67,000 supporters come from more than 130 countries, worldwide. Our volunteers and contributors are researchers, health professionals, patients, carers, people passionate about improving health outcomes for everyone, everywhere.

Getting involved in Cochrane’s work means becoming part of a global community. The Cochrane International Mobility programme connects successful applicants with a placement in a host Cochrane Group, learning more about the production, use, and knowledge translation of Cochrane reviews. The prgramme offers opportunities for learning and training not only for participants but also for host staff.

In this series, we profile those that have participated in the Cochrane International Mobility Program and learn more about their experiences.

Name: Raphaela Mayerhofer
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
CIM location: Cochrane Austria

How did you first learn about Cochrane?
Cochrane is a household name in my field, it must have been many years ago when I first heard about it

What was your experience with Cochrane International Mobility?
Even though my stay at Cochrane Austria was only four weeks long, I learned incredibly much. To make the most of my time, the team made sure I could join ongoing projects right away. I had the chance to participate in ongoing systematic reviews and rapid reviews, and work on projects assessing evidence synthesis methods. CIM gave me the opportunity to sharpen my skills and fueled my enthusiasm for evidence synthesis.

What are you doing now in relation to your Cochrane International Mobility experience?
I’m currently preparing a workshop to share what I learned with faculty members at my university.

Do you have any words of advice to anyone considering a Cochrane International Mobility experience?
Find a Cochrane Center that specializes in what interests you to make the most of it!

Specifications: Full Time (Permanent)
Salary: £85,000 per annum
Location: Flexible
Application Closing Date:  19 December 2021

Cochrane is a global, independent network of health practitioners, researchers, patient advocates and others, responding to the challenge of making vast amounts of research evidence useful for informing decisions about health. We do this by synthesizing research findings to produce the best available evidence on what can work, what might harm and where more research is needed. Our work is recognised as the international gold standard for high quality, trusted information. An understanding of Cochrane’s work and health research more generally is an advantage, but not essential.

We are now looking to recruit our first Director of Development, whose role will be to work with the global community to grow our fundraising income substantially in the coming years.  As a member of the executive leadership team, they will lead the Development Directorate and establish a fundraising operation that works collaboratively to deliver significant global income growth.

Key to success in this role will be the development and implementation of fundraising, marketing, communications, and engagement and influencing strategies – as well as understanding and ideally experience of international fundraising. As such, we are seeking an ambitious and creative individual who relishes a challenge, loves collaborative working, delivers results and has extensive experience of successfully delivering strategy.

The majority of Cochrane Central Executive staff are located in London, UK, however flexible location and/or working arrangement are possible for the right candidate.

How to apply
For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here.  The deadline to receive your application is by 19 December 2021.  The supporting statement should indicate why you are applying for the post, and how far you meet the requirements, using specific examples.

First interviews likely to be held week beginning 10 January 2022

The Centre for Epidemic Intervention Research at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, located in Oslo, Norway,  is currently seeking applicants for the following positions:

• 2 full-time researcher positions in effect studies
• 1 full-time Researcher/(bio-)statistician

The overall mission for the newly established centre is to produce more and better evidence on the effects of public health and social interventions, and non-pharmacological infection control measures, specifically. This also includes adverse consequences. The centre will collaborate with researchers, institutions, organisations, and stakeholders both nationally and internationally. The centre works closely with the World Health Organization's intiative to strengthen the evidence base for decisions about public health and social measures.

Application deadline 15 December 2021.

In this interview with lead author Christopher Gibbons, we find out more about the recently published review,  Routine provision of information on patient-reported outcome measures to healthcare providers and patients in clinical practice.

Tell us about this review
The aim of this Cochrane Review was to find out whether healthcare workers who receive information from questionnaires completed by their patients give better health care and whether their patients have better health. We collected and analysed all relevant studies.

What did you find out?
Patient questionnaire responses fed back to health workers and patients may result in moderate benefits for patient\provider communication and small benefits for patients' quality of life. Healthcare workers probably make and record more diagnoses and take more notes. The intervention probably makes little or no difference for patient's general perceptions of their health, social functioning, and pain. There appears to be no impact on physical and mental functioning, and fatigue. Our confidence in these results is limited by the quality and number of included studies for each outcome.

What was studied in the review?
When receiving health care, patients are not always asked about how they feel, either about their physical, mental or social health. This can be a problem as knowing how the patient is feeling might help to make decisions about diagnosis and the course of the treatment. One possible solution is to ask the patients to complete questionnaires about their health, and then give that information to the healthcare workers and to patients.

What are the main results of the review?
We found 116 studies (49,785 participants), all of which were from high income countries. We found that feeding back patient questionnaire responses to healthcare workers and patients probably slightly improves quality of life and increases communication between patients and their doctors, but probably does not make a lot of difference to social functioning. We are not sure of the impact on physical and mental functioning or fatigue of feeding back patient questionnaire responses as the certainty of this evidence was assessed as very low. The intervention probably increases diagnosis and note taking. We did not find studies reporting on adverse effects defined as distress following or related to Patient reported outcomes measures (PROM) completion.
 
What would you like to see happen next to provide more evidence in this area?
I would like to see more large, high quality, cluster randomized clinical trials that increase the evidence base for the intervention that use Computerized Adaptive Testing in the measurement of patient reported outcomes. In these interventions, the information which is fed-back combines standardized and individualized measurement, these randomize patients and clinicians to different modalities of feed-back interventions and recipients (including patient only, patient and professional, professional only).

Outcomes of interest include:

• adverse effects
• general health perceptions,
• specific symptoms, (cough, insomnia, nausea, anorexia, constipation, diarrhoea),
• clinicians ratings of severity,
• counselling,
• different types of visits, admissions and their length,
• patient physician relationship,
• unmet patient needs,
• quality of care and costs;
• and that focus on people with multimorbidity

Further research on the mechanisms by which the intervention operates is needed.

• Read the review in full
• Visit the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group page 

The latest update of the Cochrane review ‘Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use’ has found that rotavirus vaccines pre-qualified by the World Health Organization (WHO) (Rotarix, RotaTeq, Rotasiil, and Rotavac), prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea in children and no increased risk of serious adverse events was found.

Rotavirus infection is a common cause of diarrhoea in infants and in young children, and can cause mild illness, hospitalization, and death. Since 2009, the WHO has recommended that a rotavirus vaccine be included in all national infant and child immunization programmes. To date, 107 countries have followed this recommendation. In the years before infants and children started receiving rotavirus vaccine, rotavirus infection resulted in about 0.5 million deaths per year in children under five years of age, mainly in low- and middle-income countries.

This Cochrane Review, processed by the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group (CIDG) editorial base at Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, was first published in 2004 and has been updated five times. In 2012, in consultation with the WHO, the data underwent major restructuring by country mortality rates to reflect the observation that vaccine efficacy profiles are different in countries with different mortality rates.

The 2012, 2019, and 2021 review updates were preceded by systematic reviews commissioned by the WHO Immunization, Vaccines & Biologicals department and were used for WHO policy decisions on rotavirus vaccination schedules. These reviews were carried out by members of the author team and the subsequent Cochrane review updates built on the WHO reviews and vice versa.

The most recent review includes 60 studies: Rotarix (36 trials), RotaTeq (15 trials), Rotasiil (5 trials), and Rotavac (4 trials). The findings were presented at Session 6 - Rotavirus Vaccines at the October 2020 SAGE Meeting and was provided to SAGE Members as key background material to inform discussions (access presentation and background materials here).  As a result of this SAGE discussions, an updated WHO Rotavirus Vaccine Position Paper was published on 16 July 2021).  This position paper provides global advice on rotavirus vaccine policy.  In turn, the updated WHO position paper and the supporting background materials support Regional and National Immunization Technical Advisory group discussions which lead to decisions for local rotavirus vaccine policies.

Lead author, Hanna Bergman, noted, “The two globally established vaccines already have a proven track record and we now have high confidence in the two newer vaccines, all showing similar efficacy in preventing severe rotavirus diarrhea in infants and young children in high-mortality settings. This review also reinforces that more work needs to be done to improve and explore the reasons behind the lower efficacy of rotavirus vaccines seen in high-mortality countries.”

Bergman H, Henschke N, Hungerford D, Pitan F, Ndwandwe D, Cunliffe N, Soares‐Weiser K. Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2021, Issue 11. Art. No.: CD008521. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008521.pub6.

The editorial base of the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group is funded by UK aid from the UK government for the benefit of low- and middle-income countries (project number 300342-104). The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the UK government’s official policies.

• Read the full review here
• Visit the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group website here

This review provides insight into the effectiveness of measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.

While there are limitations to this review, the review demonstrates that a range of different measures can be effective at reducing COVID-19 transmission, especially when multiple interventions are implemented together. Importantly, the review demonstrates that schools can stay open (or reopen) safely when prevention measures are implemented effectively. The effectiveness of interventions is influenced by many things, including the levels of community transmission. Given the rapid and widespread advancements in prevention and containment measures, most notably, the COVID-19 vaccines and increases in testing capacity, as well as the rise of more transmissible variants of the virus, an update to this review may yield very different results.

What was studied in the review?
In order to reduce the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, many governments and societies put mitigation measures in place in schools. However, we do not know whether these measures work with regards to reducing the spread of the virus, or how these measures affect other aspects of life, such as education, the economy or society as a whole.

Key messages
Reopening schools or keeping schools open while having a broad range of measures in place can reduce transmission of the virus that causes COVID-19. Such measures can also reduce the number of people who will need to go to hospital due to developing COVID-19. However very little is known about other consequences of these measures, such as those linked to education, resources, and physical or mental health, as this knowledge is mostly based on studies modelling the real world. More studies set in the real world using real-world data are needed.

Lead author Shari Krishnaratne explains:

“This review provides insight into the effectiveness of measures implemented in schools to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Whilst the review addresses a very important question there are limitations to the evidence it provides. We searched for studies for the review in December 2020, at a time when there was a lack of real-world evidence. As such, most of the studies included in this review use modelling. This review therefore shows an overall absence of real-world evidence about the effectiveness of these measures. However, there is enough evidence from the modelling studies and in other reviews such as one on travel measures for us to have some confidence that there is likely to be a positive effect on transmission, but how an intervention works in one location might not be the same as in another.
 
There are limitations to the evidence, but it does suggest that schools can stay open (or reopen) safely when prevention measures are implemented effectively. The effectiveness of interventions is influenced by many things, including the levels of community transmission. Given the rapid and widespread advancements in prevention and containment measures, most notably, the COVID-19 vaccines and increases in testing capacity, as well as the rise of more transmissible variants of the virus, an update to this review may yield very different results.”

What are measures implemented in the school setting?
Measures in the school setting can be grouped into the following four broad categories.

1. Measures reducing the opportunity for contacts: by reducing the number of students in a class or a school, opening certain school types only (for example primary schools) or by creating a schedule by which students attend school on different days or in different weeks, the face-to-face contact between students can be reduced.
2. Measures making contacts safer: by putting measures in place such as face masks, improving ventilation by opening windows or using air purifiers, cleaning, handwashing, or modifying activities like sports or music, contacts can be made safer.
3. Surveillance and response measures: screening for symptoms or testing sick or potentially sick students, or teachers, or both, and putting them into isolation (for sick people) or quarantine (for potentially sick people).
4. Multicomponent measures: measures from categories 1, 2 and 3 are combined.

What is the aim of the review?
The authors aimed to find out which measures implemented in the school setting allow schools to safely reopen, stay open, or both, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

What did we do?
They searched for studies that looked at the impact of these types of measures in the school setting on the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, the impact on the healthcare system (i.e. how many hospital beds are needed), as well as important social aspects (i.e. how often students attended school). The studies could focus on students, teachers and other school staff, as well as on families and the whole community. They could use real-life data (observational studies) or data from computer-generated simulations (modelling studies).

View the video in German, French, or Spanish

What are the main results of the review?
The authors found 38 relevant studies. Most of these were modelling studies (33 studies). Five studies used real-world data. Twenty studies were conducted in North or South America, 16 in Europe and two in China.

Below we summarise the main findings by category.

1. Measures reducing the opportunity for contacts
   The authors found 23 modelling studies assessing measures to reduce the opportunity for contacts. All studies showed reductions in the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19 and the use of the healthcare system. Some studies also showed a reduction in the number of days spent in school due to the intervention.
2. Measures making contacts safer
   The authors found 11 modelling studies and two real-world studies looking at measures, such as mask wearing in schools, cleaning, handwashing, and ventilation. Five of these studies combined multiple measures, which means we cannot see which specific measures worked and which did not. Most studies showed reductions in the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19; some studies, however, showed mixed or no effects.
3. Surveillance and response measures
   We found 13 modelling studies and one real-world study assessing surveillance and response measures. Twelve studies focused on mass testing and isolation measures, while two looked specifically at symptom-based screening and isolation. Most studies showed results in favour of the intervention, however some showed mixed or no effects
4. Multicomponent measures
   They found three studies that looked at multicomponent interventions, where it was not possible to determine the effect of each individual intervention. These included one modelling study and two real-world studies. These studies assessed physical distancing, modification of activities, cancellation of sports or music classes, testing, exemption of high-risk students, handwashing, and face masks. Most studies showed reduced transmission of the virus that causes COVID-19, however some showed mixed or no effects.

How confident are we in the findings of this review?
Confidence in these results is limited. Most studies used models, that is, they estimated the effects of the interventions rather than observing outcomes. As the models are built on assumptions about how the virus spreads and how people behave, we lack real-world evidence. Many studies were published as 'preprints' without undergoing rigorous checks of published studies, which further limits confidence. Also, the studies were very different from each other (for example, with regards to the levels of transmission in the community).

How up to date is this evidence?
The evidence is up-to-date to December 2020. It is expected this review will be updated in Spring 2022.

• Read the full review
• Visit the Cochrane Public Health group website

Cochrane Library Special Collections provide a round-up of up-to-date Cochrane evidence on a specific topic. This Special Collection contains Cochrane Reviews summarizing data on the benefits and harms of several interventions for preventing and treating influenza. The Cochrane Reviews look at  vaccines, antiviral drugs, and physical interventions, such as the use of masks and hand washing.

This evidence for physical interventions may help inform policies and practices relevant to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. These comprehensive reviews provide valuable information for patients, doctors, and healthcare decision-makers about what steps to take or interventions to use to prevent influenza or aid its treatment.

• View the Special Collection
• Visit the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections website