Cochrane community contributes to update to the PRISMA statement. PRISMA is an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. PRISMA primarily focuses on the reporting of reviews evaluating the effects of interventions, but can also be used as a basis for reporting systematic reviews with objectives other than evaluating interventions (e.g. evaluating aetiology, prevalence, diagnosis or prognosis). 

A dedicated global team of methodologists, search specialists, biostatisticians and systematic reviewers have spent the last few years diligently updating PRISMA - the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. First published in 2009, PRISMA was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. 

While this may sound simple, it is anything but. Systematic reviews are complex, using an array of methods from the identification of studies through to the synthesis of results, and careful reporting is required so that users of the review (such as guideline developers, policy makers, healthcare providers and patients) are able to understand what was done and how the findings might apply to them.

The updated open-access PRISMA statement is available online and published in no less than five leading journals - including BMJ, PLOS Medicine, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Systematic Reviews and International Journal of Surgery. It represents a major global collaborative effort which was sustained throughout the many challenging months dominated by COVID-19 throughout 2020. The project had strong representation from Monash University's School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, with co-leads Matthew Page and Joanne McKenzie (and David Moher, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute) and contributors Sue Brennan and Steve McDonald. This representation reflects the calibre of systematic review expertise within the School - with specialisation in methods for bias, statistics, certainty of the evidence (GRADE) and searching.

PRISMA workshop participants, Cochrane Colloquium, Edinburgh 2018

‘This was such a rewarding experience thanks to the enthusiastic input, detailed deliberations and expert contributions from both our local team and fellow researchers around the world,’ lead author Matthew Page explains. ‘The updating process involved lengthy consultation and a comprehensive survey of systematic reviewers, journal editors and methodologists with experience with and interest in the use of the previous iterations of PRISMA.’

‘We obtained a lot of valuable feedback via our initial survey. In addition to answers to more straightforward multiple choice questions, we also collated over 100 pages worth of collective free text comments from respondents who felt really passionately about particular reporting elements, and specified what they thought should or shouldn’t be included in the updated guideline. We had this wealth of feedback to draw on and discuss at our two day workshop at the Cochrane Colloquium in Edinburgh back in 2018, which was fantastic. A healthy degree of consensus emerged from that, followed by much drafting, redrafting and careful considerations around the clarity of language used to update existing and outline new recommendations. This was followed up by piloting with authors to get their feedback and incorporate a final round of changes.’ 

Joanne McKenzie played a critical role throughout this process, co-facilitating the development meeting and processing the meeting notes, developing the updated guideline structure and overseeing the inclusion of guidance on new statistical developments that have been introduced in the decade since the original PRISMA statement was released. 

‘We know systematic reviews are essential for healthcare providers, policy makers, and other decision makers, who would otherwise be confronted by an overwhelming amount of research to guide their decisions,’ Joanne says. ‘We really wanted to make this a practical, accessible and contemporary checklist both for systematic reviewers and for the many different users who depend on them. As such, we included detailed information about why reporting of each item is recommended along with plenty of examples from published reviews.’ 

‘We’re hopeful that these kinds of changes and additions to PRISMA 2020 will encourage greater uptake of the guideline and lead to more transparent, complete and accurate reporting of systematic reviews around the globe. There are plenty of positives in that for everyone.’ 

In a study Matthew Page and colleagues conducted on Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews in PLOS Medicine back in 2016, around 29% of authors explicitly reported that they used the PRISMA Statement to guide either the conduct or reporting of their review, and all those who worked on this update are hopeful this number will continue to rise. 

‘Looking ahead, we’ll continue to work together to plan and design interventions and software to help with future implementation,’ Joanne concludes. ‘We’re keen to evaluate both the use and usability of PRISMA 2020 in the months and years to come, so while we’re excited about the launch today it’s definitely part of a bigger picture plan to support and encourage more accurate and complete reporting of systematic reviews now and into the future.’ 

•  Visit the PRISMA website
• Read the original article on the Cochrane Australia website

In March 2020, Cochrane Australia convened the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce - bringing together leading health researchers, experts and organisations from across the country.

Since then, over 240 members have worked around the clock to deliver living clinical guidelines and flowcharts for frontline health workers.  The guidelines are updated and published online every week, they feature 124 guideline recommendations and have reached more than 180,000 users worldwide.

To learn more about the work of Cochrane Australia and how the Taskforce is continuing to evolve, click here to read a short case story.

Cochrane Austria, together with TranspariMED and Transparency International Austria, has recently published a report on clinical trial transparency in Austria, which provides an update on figures released one year ago.

The report uses data from the EU Trials Tracker to summarise the clinical drug trial reporting rates of the 14 largest sponsors in Austria. Under EU rules, clinical trial sponsors must post summary results to the EU Clinical Trials Register within one year of a study ending, or six months for paediatric trials.

According to the new report, results have now been published for 37% of due clinical trials, compared to just 18%, as cited in 2020.

While this is impressive progress – with some institutions making significant efforts to publish their backlog of results – there is still more work to be done. 233 completed and overdue trials are still awaiting results on the EU registry, and half of the sponsors have made no progress at all.

Barbara Nussbaumer-Streit, co-director of Cochrane Austria, said: “The trend towards better reporting is welcome. However, we should not forget that two thirds of trial results are still missing. This can lead to delays in the development of new and effective therapies, and thereby harms patients.”

Gerald Gartlehner, co-director of Cochrane Austria, said: "Missing clinical trial results can lead to patients receiving ineffective therapies because doctors lack important information."

Cochrane supports clinical trial transparency. We rely on the availability of trial results to produce high quality and relevant systematic reviews. When trial results are left unpublished, it is impossible to make truly evidence-informed decisions about healthcare and people can be put at risk.

• Read more on the Cochrane Austria website
• Read  and download the full report

Register for the 'A day with... Statistics Methods Group’ which is taking place on 11 May 2021.

This is part of a series of virtual events from Cochrane Training for anyone interested in systematic review methodology and the work of Cochrane Methods Groups. Whether you are new to systematic review methodology or an advanced-level learner, these virtual events will be an opportunity for you to meet and learn from colleagues from different Methods Groups, with a variety of online events happening throughout the day.

This all-day event will highlight the Cochrane Statistics Methods Group and methods and issues around heterogeneity. There will be presentations from early career researchers and a virtual 'get-to-know-you' networking session. You can register for a session on the latest methodological developments, pose a challenging methods question for one of our experts, explore some of the free learning that is available, or take part in Twitter chats using #adaywithCochraneSMG. 

• View the full program and register for free

Interview with Heather Tubwon, the artist that created the new limited edition designs in the Cochrane store celebrating Anne Anderson and our diverse community.

The global Cochrane community are participating in a virtual walk and raising money for the annual Anne Anderson Award, which is given to a Cochrane member who has contributed meaningfully to the promotion of women as leaders and contributors to the organization. To mark this occasion, we have added limited editions designs to the Cochrane store, with sales going to the Anne Anderson Award.  We caught up with the artist, Heather Tubwon, to learn more about her and new designs. 

Hi Heather! Our Cochrane Community always finds it interesting to learn the backstory to things and learn more about people. Could you tell us a bit more about yourself? 
Sure! I'm from the Midwest in the United States. I have a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in Illustration from the Minneapolis College of Art and Design. I have a background in Graphic Design, Illustration, and Textile/Surface Design. Some of my favorite jobs have included creating artwork for toys, children’s clothes, and stationery products  - and now for Cochrane!

Was art something you always were interested in?
Yes - When I was around 10, my classmates noticed some of my drawings and told me I was really good at it. That’s when I first considered art as a career. However, life had a lot of twists and turns for me, and I ended up working in the airline industry. One of my tasks in that role was writing, creating diagrams, and laying out an FAA approved manual to teach Flight Operations personnel new software. I really enjoyed this work, and thought I might enjoy being a Graphic Designer professionally. After taking some design classes in art school, I realized my real passion was illustration.

These designs were a bit different for us. They are centered around our Cochrane Community event, the Anne Anderson Walk. While we knew we wanted to incorporate our brand colours, we were looking for something  playful. How would you describe your style?
I would describe my style as colorful, whimsical, and fun. I feel like I create my best work when I’m having fun, and I hope this joy comes across in my work. If I can make someone smile through my work, then I feel like I have accomplished my goal.

We launched the Anne Anderson Walk on International Woman's Day and are highlighting all the virtual walk pictures on a global map. Diversity is a core value to the Cochrane Community and one of our strengths too - so  we really wanted celebrate that. Why do you think showing diversity is important in visual arts? 
I think that showing diversity is important in visual arts. I am multiracial myself - my primarily ethnically is Ashkenazi Jewish and Black. There have been many times where I was not able to see other people that looked like me in media, especially as a child. Growing up, my local library only had two books showing biracial or multiracial families. This made me feel othered, or like I was different from everyone else. That’s why I always strive to show diversity in my own work. Cochrane shows diversity not only in it's member make-up but also in it's methods and the contributions people make - I created the design to represent that. 

 Anne Anderson is a beloved person in the Cochrane Community. Can you tell us a bit about working on that artwork?
After reading about Anne Anderson, I was impressed with all that she was able to accomplish in her short life. She seemed like a very ambitious and driven woman, someone who was a role model for many. I was honored to be asked to create a portrait of her. In creating her portrait, I wanted to be respectful and honor her legacy, while at the same time creating a work that was playful and engaging. 

• See the limited edition Anne Anderson Walk designs in the Cochrane Store
• Visit Heather Tubwon's website
• Visit Heather Tubwon's Instagram account

Latest episode of the Dementia Researcher podcast chats about the work of Cochrane, how we support evidence-informed decision making in healthcare, our work on undertaking systematic reviews, and how you could become involved.

The Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group create reviews and methods guidance on all aspects of dementia, delirium and other cognitive disorders.  Recent outputs have included a focus on diagnosis of dementia, which have been curated in to a Cochrane Library Special Collection,  and reviews on prognosis and complex interventions.

The group Coordinating Editors are Dr Jenny McCleery and Dr Terry Quinn and they recently spoke with Dr Anna Volkmer and Adam Smith on the Dementia Researcher podcast.  This biweekly podcast bring together panels of early career researchers and other dementia experts to discuss their research and career topics to support other early career researchers. The podcast covers research investigating Alzheimer's and other dementias, exploring prevention, diagnosis, treatments, care and how they're working to better understand the disease and the brain. For this session of the podcast they chatted about the work of Cochrane, how we support evidence-informed decision making in healthcare, our work on undertaking systematic reviews, and how you could become involved.

Terry (@DrTerryQuinn) is Senior Lecturer and Honorary Consultant in University of Glasgow. In addition to his Cochrane role,  he works with the NIHR Complex Reviews Support Unit assisting author teams with evidence synthesis methods. Terry is passionate about increasing research capacity and supporting early career researchers and he hopes that the podcast will inspire enthusiastic researchers to get involved with Cochrane.

Jenny is a Consultant Psychiatrist in Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust. Her work has involved older adults with dementia and their families for 25 years and her enthusiasm for Cochrane is driven by a wish to help provide accurate and accessible answers to the clinical questions important to her patients and colleagues.

• Visit the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group website
• Listen to the podcast episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts
• Visit the Dementia Researcher website 
• Visit the citizen scientist platform, Cochrane Crowd
• Volunteer on the Cochrane TaskExchange platform

In the Medical Degree Program at Lund University, Sweden, a new Scientific Scholarship theme has been implemented, including evidence-based medicine (EBM), as the application of scientific scholarship in EBM is a core aspect of medical education. Throughout the program, scientific scholarship and EBM are supported by multifaceted learning activities and structured assessment, ensuring that students work continuously and iteratively with these concepts. The theme also makes use of e-learning for written assignments and of Cochrane Interactive Learning modules together with locally developed e-lectures.

Lead author, Maria Björklund, Librarian at the Faculty of Medicine, reported “the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules cover the process of how to conduct a systematic review, from formulating a question to finding, assessing and summarising evidence from studies. Each module contains videos, quizzes and exercises and an assessment that generates a certificate. Students upload their certificates to the university’s learning management system as part of the formal course assessment. The modules’ contents are of high quality, the level is challenging and requires students to be engaged. The assessment tasks and modules can be revisited, which gives opportunity for repetition. The methodology of conducting a systematic review contains many elements that are necessary to master also for other evidence-based work relevant to students in their role as future physicians, such as clinical guideline development. Therefore, the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules were considered highly relevant to integrate in the Scientific Scholarship theme.”

She concluded, “our implementation of the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules where they match the learning objectives is successful, in line with previous findings. Together with locally developed e-lectures and specialized library support students get additional context and examples. Collaboration with an evidence expert organization, such as Cochrane, give students authentic and international context together with an understanding of the importance of systematic reviews in EBM. This has led to a significant increase in the number of students performing a systematic review as their master thesis.”

Tips from Lund University

• To help embedding the Cochrane interactive Learning modules in courses it’s good if the learning outcomes of the course match the Cochrane module.
• It will also help if you plan to use the Cochrane modules as part of the  overall course assessment.
• If needed, the modules can be studied and used over several semesters.
• If students are new to systematic reviews, it’s good to give them context, perhaps with other locally developed learning activities explaining the methodology of systematic reviews.
• Invite people to collaborate in using Cochrane Interactive Learning - librarians, teachers, clinicians - to help students get many examples and situations where the Cochrane modules can be used.

Chris Watts, Cochrane’s Learning Manager added “It’s fantastic to see our Cochrane Interactive Learning modules used in this way. We have designed the suite of modules so that, as well as being used by individuals as standalone, self-directed learning, they can also be adopted by trainers to use as part of blended learning approaches. The modular design and clear learning outcomes for the modules helps trainers to select and integrate Cochrane Interactive Learning into their learning programmes. The work at Lund is an excellent example of that, and we’re keen to encourage others to do the same or share their experiences of doing so with us.”

Contact the Learning Team about using the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules as part of your blended learning training, via support@cochrane.org

Learning progression from basic scientific scholarship to evidence-based medicine: a multimodal approach. Björklund, Maria; Perez, Maria Thereza; Regnér, Sara; Garwicz, Martin. Lund: Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, 2020. Research output : Working paper

• Find further information about Cochrane Interactive Learning here
• Find out more about new learning opportunities in evidence-based health care for medical students in Sweden

Watch Cochrane US Senior Officer, Tiffany Duque, as the featured guest on the Addictive Brain videocast. Tiffany spoke to  Dr. Chinmaya  Sadangi for the session called "Interview with a Scientist." 

The Addictive Brain is an online community aiming at bridging the gap between science and the world in general. Their audience is mostly non-scientists and students, so they communicate in simple language and avoid scientific jargons - making science and health evidence accessible! 

They chatted about health evidence synthesis, it's importance and use, the "infodemic" we are currently facing, and how anyone can get involved in Cochrane.  You'll learn a lot in 30 minutes!

Tiffany mentions lots of resources available to those new to Cochrane; here are some of the key links:

• Visit the Cochrane US website
  
• View the Evidence Essential training resource
• Learn about how to get involved in Cochrane
• Learn about the Infodemic
• Visit about the citizen scientist platform, Cochrane Crowd
• Volunteer on Cochrane TaskExchange
• Learn more about the Cochrane's Early Career Professionals Group upcoming activities
• Visit the Students 4 Best Evidence website
• Find training events and resources on Cochrane Training 
• Visit the Addictive Brain website

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: Vanessa Young
Location: USA-Germany/Italy
Cochrane Cochrane Rehabilitation, Italy

How did you first learn about Cochrane?
I started referring to Cochrane as an undergraduate student to find reputable reviews for my research courses. Cochrane facilitated finding articles pertaining to the scope of my work as well as honing my critical thinking in a scientific but well-organized fashion that allowed me to seek out answers to the questions that I had. Most recently, I became attracted to their “plain language” section that I embraced in order to better develop my written and verbal communication skills with patients or people not familiar with the subject of neuropsychology.

What was your experience with Cochrane International Mobility?
My experience at Cochrane Rehabilitation was enlightening both personally and professionally. Highly regarded professionals like Dr. Chiara Arienti were willing to extend their trust, faith and confidence in my work despite navigating the complexities of a systematic review and the protocol process for the first time in a collaborative environment. It was a wonderful way to learn and grow as part of a distinguished team that inspired and motivated me through their assistance.

What are you doing now in relation to your Cochrane International Mobility Experience?
Currently, we’ve submitted the protocol for the PTSD interventions as they apply to the clinical rehabilitation process. We are in process of beginning the article screening and data extraction process culminating in the potential for publication and the distinct career building privilege to be listed as a co-author of the project.
 
Do you have any words of advice to anyone considering a Cochrane International Mobility Experience?
If you are a hardworking, eager to learn young researcher just beginning to build the knowledge, skills and experience base required to thrive, consider Cochrane. Cochrane provides unique accessibility and many windows of opportunity to interact with senior researchers on meaningful projects. The senior professionals patiently mentor their younger colleagues as worthy contributors deserving of their role on the team and provide priceless counsel. The main lesson is that science is a collaborative process requiring invested contributors and novel ideas that are not afraid to challenge the status quo.

Mindfulness has been growing in popularity across the globe over the past decade and is increasingly the subject of scientific research into the benefits it may deliver. In 2020, six students from Melbourne’s Monash University sought to better understand if and how mindfulness practice could help fellow medical students and junior doctors deal with the significant stresses and demands of their studies and chosen profession.

Alice Jiang, Gizem Hasimoglu, Jonathan Shachar, Qiao Xin Tee, Darren Trinh and Praba Sekhar signed up for the formidable task of completing a Cochrane systematic review of the latest evidence as part of the School of Public Health and Preventative Medicine’s Scholarly Intensive Placement (SIP) program.  Cochrane Australia is based at Monash within the School of Public Health, giving the eager students direct access to all the right tools, support and supervisors.

‘We had all briefly looked at mindfulness during medical school,’ Praba explains. ‘So it was really interesting to be involved in a project that evaluated and assessed the effectiveness of mindfulness in a target population that I’m actually a part of. We know both from our first-hand experiences as students and from the extensive research that we conducted, that levels of psychological distress, depression and anxiety are consistently higher in medical students. Studies here in Australia found 48% of medical students to be psychologically distressed - that’s more than four times that of peers the same age. Junior doctors work longer hours (averaging 50 hours a week), and students report high expectations, competitiveness, frequent exams, heavy study loads and many time pressures as key contributing factors. Given mindfulness is now widely considered for beneficial and therapeutic uses, exploring how it might help stressed-out students and doctors as part of this placement program made a lot of sense.’

Supervised by Cochrane Australia’s Dr Tari Turner and Professor Sally Green, the students completed the SIP program and their Cochrane review using a unique relay-style approach - exploring both the evidence on mindfulness, and the challenges and rewards of conducting a systematic review.

‘All of our SIP participants proved themselves to be incredibly clever, creative and committed,’ Tari says. ‘Each student worked intensely for short periods of between six to nine weeks and passed the baton to the next person to progress the review. Collectively they covered everything from developing a protocol, to searching and selecting studies, collecting and analysing data, and understanding risk of bias, health economics and equity in systematic reviews. The result of this extraordinary effort is tangible. Mindfulness-based psychological interventions for improving mental well-being in medical students and junior doctors is now with Cochrane for peer-review and is expected to be published later this year. Sally and I are really impressed with and proud of all of our SIP students’ individual and collaborative achievements.’

The consensus among participants is similarly positive. ‘My work with Cochrane Australia gave me a wider appreciation for the time-intensive nature and thoroughness needed to carry out a Cochrane Systematic Review,’ Praba says. ‘I particularly enjoyed learning about specific technical skills required. Performing thorough data extraction and risk of bias was an invaluable experience. The skills I gained have enhanced my ability to make clinical judgement as a medical practitioner, and increased my ability to understand, scrutinise and evaluate medical advice and evidence.’

Fellow participant Darren Trinh couldn’t agree more and found the SIP program changed his perspective on many aspects of both research and researchers. ‘I had an image in my head that presented researchers as very competitive, very busy, scary people - probably akin to an evil lab scientist who had to compete for grants to put food on their table with no time for medical students who are thrust upon them,’ he quips. ‘Fortunately, this was the complete opposite of my experience and I thoroughly enjoyed interacting with researchers at Cochrane and internationally.’

‘The collaboration during the systematic review process offered an amazing insight that has changed the way I see systematic reviews. So many people work together, sharing an incredible amount of energy, resources and skill to create this single piece of evidence. It’s now clear to me why systematic reviews are seen as the peak of the evidence pyramid.’

• Visit the Cochrane Australia Website
  
  
  Words: Shauna Hurley
  Updated: 11 March 2021

This recently published Cochrane review examines the effects of a class of treatments on people with COVID-19. 

Treating COVID-19 with tocilizumab (a medicine that blocks interleukin-6) reduces the numbers of people who die within 28 days of treatment, and probably results in fewer serious unwanted effects than placebo treatment.

Studies of other medicines that block interleukin-6 to treat COVID-19 are under way. The authors of this review will update this review when results from them become available.

COVID-19

COVID-19 is an infectious respiratory disease caused by a type of virus called a coronavirus. If the infection becomes severe, people may need intensive care and support in hospital, including machines to help them breathe (mechanical ventilation). Medicines that are currently used to treat other diseases are being tested in the search to find effective treatments for COVID-19.

Blocking interleukin 6

An immune response is how the body recognises and defends itself against harmful substances, such as viruses. COVID-19 can disrupt the immune system, causing it to over-react and produce dangerously high levels of inflammation. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is a protein involved in triggering inflammation. Blocking the production of interleukin-6 could reduce inflammation and help the immune system to fight COVID-19.

Why did the authors do this Cochrane Review?

Tocilizumab and sarilumab are two medicines that block interleukin-6. They are used to treat other conditions that involve an "over-reactive" immune system, such as rheumatoid arthritis. We wanted to find out if medicines that block interleukin-6 can be used to treat COVID-19, and whether they might cause any unwanted effects.

What did the authors do?

They searched for studies that tested if medicines that block interleukin-6 could treat COVID-19.

They looked for randomised controlled studies, in which the treatments people received were decided by chance. This type of study usually gives the most reliable evidence about the effects of a treatment.

Search date: The authors searched for trials up to 26 February 2021.

What they found

The author team found 10 studies in 6896 people with COVID-19. The average age of people in the studies was 56 to 65 years, and 66% of the people enrolled were men. The studies took place in Brazil, China, France, Italy, the UK and the USA; four studies took place in more than one country. Three studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies.

The medicines tested were tocilizumab and sarilumab. Both medicines were compared against a placebo (a dummy treatment that appears identical to the medicine being tested but without any active medicine) or standard care. The results were measured 28 days after treatment and after 60 days or more.

The authors also found 41 more studies of medicines blocking interleukin-6 to treat COVID-19 that had not yet published any results. These included 20 studies of tocilizumab, 11 studies of sarilumab and 10 studies of other medicines. Some of those studies are still ongoing and we will update this review to include their results when published.

What are the main results of this review?

Compared with placebo treatment or standard treatment, treatment with tocilizumab:

• reduces the number of people who died, of any cause, after 28 days (evidence from 6363 people in 8 studies); on average, 32 fewer people per 1000 died when treated with tocilizumab plus standard care, compared with standard care alone or placebo;
• probably makes little or no difference to clinical improvement (which is leaving hospital or improvement in COVID-19 symptoms) at 28 days (evidence from 5585 people in 7 studies); and
• probably reduces slightly the number of serious unwanted effects, such as life-threatening conditions or death (evidence from 2312 people in 8 studies).

The authors are uncertain about the effects of tocilizumab treatment on:

• severity of COVID-19; that is, how many patients died of COVID-19 or needed a ventilator or additional organ support at 28 days (evidence from 712 people in 3 studies); or 
• how many patients died, of any cause, after 60 days or more (evidence from 519 people in 2 studies).

No results were reported for tocilizumab after 60 days or more for improvement, or severity at 28 days of COVID-19.

The author team are uncertain about how sarilumab treatment affected the: 

• numbers of people who died (of any cause) at 28 days (evidence from 880 people in 2 studies) and after 60 days (evidence from 420 people in 1 study); or
• the numbers of serious unwanted effects, such as life-threatening conditions or death (evidence from 880 people in 2 studies). 
• Sarilumab probably does not cause more unwanted effects (of any type) than placebo treatment (evidence from 420 people in 1 study). No other results for sarilumab treatment were reported.

The authors were not able to explore which COVID-19 patients are more likely to benefit from this treatment.

Confidence in the results

The authors are confident that tocilizumab reduced the number of deaths (from any cause) at 28 days. Their confidence in the other results for tocilizumab is moderate to low; further evidence may change these results. Their confidence in the results for sarilumab is low; further evidence is likely to change these results. The authors' confidence was lowered because some of the studies did not report all their results.

Lead author Professor Isabelle Boutron explains, “In the rush to find effective treatments, good quality evidence is critical for health workers treating COVID-19 patients. We looked at this treatment because immunosuppressive effect of Interleukin 6 blocking agents might be valuable in patients with COVID-19 and found that it is a fast moving field. Some treatments, such as tocilizumab, seem beneficial on mortality at day 28 although more data are needed to identify which patients are more likely to benefit from the treatment. New data are available regularly  therefore we plan to update this review when results become available."

•  Read the full review on the Cochrane Library
• Visit the Cochrane Emergency and Critical Care Group website

Cochrane has signed a World Health Organization (WHO) Declaration that calls for a more equitable rollout of COVID-19 vaccines.

While several countries currently have vaccination programmes up and running, the global distribution of vaccines has so far been unequal. Many low- and middle-income countries are yet to receive any doses and face uncertainties about access.

The WHO Declaration highlights that quick and equitable rollout of vaccines will be key to avoiding future variants, saving lives, and ultimately ending the pandemic. It therefore calls on global, national and local leaders to reject vaccine nationalism and to prioritise the equitable distribution of vaccines in every country – focusing first on health workers and those at highest risk.

Cochrane firmly believes in the principle of equity and is proud to support this global initiative.

Read the full declaration here

Specifications: Part time 22.5 hours (Fixed term/Secondment/Consultancy role)
Salary: between £35,000 to £40,000 per annum full time equivalent
Location: Flexible
Application Closing Date:  5 April 2021

The Cochrane Methods Support Unit was created in 2019 to support the eight Cochrane Review Group (CRG) Networks in the efficient and timely production of high quality, high priority Cochrane systematic reviews. The MSU provides hands on statistical and methods support to Cochrane systematic reviews methods input on request by CRG Network editorial teams. The unit comprises two part-time Statistical Editors and one full time Systematic Review Methodology Editor.  

As Statistical Editor, you will provide advanced research methods support and advice as requested by Network Editorial Teams (Network Senior Editor, Associate Editor or Network Support Fellow) or field queries from the Community Support Team as needed. The post holder will also provide independent methods review of high-profile reviews, including those intended for press release.  In addition to this he or she will support the implementation of established and more complex methods in Cochrane reviews and work on monitoring the quality of statistical methods and analysis in Cochrane reviews to inform priorities for training and guidance. The role will require a formal qualification in epidemiology or biomedical statistics, and a good understanding of methods used in meta-analysis.

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.

The majority of Cochrane Central Executive staff are located in London, UK, however flexible location or a part-time appointment 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 5 April 2021.
• 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.
• Interviews to be held on: w/c 26 April 2021
  
  

Cochrane Library Special Collections provide a round-up of up-to-date Cochrane evidence on a specific topic. This Special Collection provides evidence in several key clinical priority areas for brain tumour research. The reviews in this Collection provide evidence towards clinical priority areas for research, and their funding, and therefore, are important for consumers, clinicians, healthcare providers and funders.

Topics include:

• Diagnosing brain tumours quickly, safely, and accurately
• Risk-sharing in decision making for brain tumours
• Best treatment when decisions are difficult

 When asked about the new Special Collection, Helen Bulbeck, Director of policy and services at brainstrust said, "We’re excited by the launch of this neuro-oncology collection. It reflects true collaboration between the Cochrane Organisation, the James Lind Alliance, the National Institute of Health Research, the National Cancer Research Institute and, most importantly, people who are living with brain cancer. This is transforming the neuro-oncology clinical research landscape."

A patient with glioblastoma at recurrence commented, "When you’re living with a brain tumour, there’s never a right and wrong decision. So these reviews are vital for people living with a brain tumour. I know, on my own brain tumour pathway, that there have been times when I have been so conflicted about which decision to make. I feel well; should I or shouldn’t I have a scan? Should I delay or start treatment? Should I just get on with living my life? So evidence around risk taking that helps you make the choice that is right for you, which you can share with your clinical team, is a gift. I wish more people knew about these reviews. I will talk about them with my doctors."

A caregiver of an elderly parent with a glioblastoma noted, "I think using patient advocacy resources has become more important since lockdown because MDTs and other cancer centre resources are so stretched. Sometimes you need to get all you can without the help of the medical community who are dealing as best they can with more urgent cases and themselves often in the front line of coronavirus! Finding these brain tumour Cochrane evidence reviews has helped my family and plugged a gap."

A special Evidently blog post for people living with a brain tumour, healthcare practitioners and anyone with an interest in brain tumours has been posted. In it,  Helen Bulbeck, Cochrane consumer representative and director of policy and services for brainstrust, looks at the latest Cochrane evidence on brain tumours and reflects on what this special collection means for the brain tumour community and why collaboration has been key to the success of this work.

• View the Special Collection 

Professor James "Jimmy" Volmink, the founding Director of the South African Cochrane Centre, was recognized for his exceptional lifelong contributions to medical research and public health with the Presidential Award from The South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC).

SAMRCed host its 7th SAMRC Scientific Merit Awards with a ceremony of a small outdoor gathering of attendees following COVID-19 protocols at the organisation’s Head Office in Cape Town and an online audience. You can watch the awards ceremony and Jimmy's acceptance speech in this video:

Jimmy reflects on reflects his personal and professional journey in this 'Recommended Dose' podcast. His current role at Stellenbosch - one of South Africa’s most pre-eminent universities - is itself a striking testament to the kind of change he has witnessed, worked towards and continues to advocate for. When he applied to study at Stellenbosch back in the 1980s, Jimmy was turned down because he was black. Almost four decades later, he holds the prestigious position of Dean of Medicine and Health Sciences at that very same university. Here, Jimmy shares with Ray how this and many other formative experiences have led to his lifelong, unwavering commitment to support and mentor new generations of students in South Africa and to keep on 'banging the drum about inequality' to affect real change.

Please join us in offering Professor Volmink congratulations on this honour and best wishes for the future.

• Visit the Cochrane South Africa website
• Professor Volmink on Twitter

Specifications: Full Time (Fixed Term/Consultancy role)
Salary: circa £40,000 per annum
Location: Flexible
Application Closing Date:  24 March 2021


Cochrane has established a centrally-resourced Editorial Service to support the efficient and timely publication of high-quality systematic reviews in the Cochrane Library. The reviews that are published through the Central Editorial Service address some of the research questions considered to be the most important to decision makers.

The Central Editorial Service will also be instrumental in running a pilot of approaches to increase editorial efficiency and integrity within Cochrane. The Managing Editor role will play a key role in operationalising this pilot.

Reporting to the Executive Editor of the Central Editorial Service, the Managing Editor will manage the editorial process of protocols and reviews submitted to the Central Editorial Service. The role-holder should be alert to the demands of delivering high-quality review content for publication in a timely fashion, and work to ensure that deadlines can be met.   

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.

The majority of Cochrane Central Executive staff are located in London, UK, however flexible location or a part-time appointment 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 24 March 2021
• 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
• Interviews to be held on: 8 and 9 April 2021