To register a title with the Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group, a potential author submits a registration
form the Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group's
web-site or on request from the editorial office.
The completed registration form should contain:
1. A preliminary
title
2. Contact details for the authors
3. One sentence briefly describing the authors' clinical question
4. Participants, interventions and outcomes
5. Input of statistician and sub-set analysis
All new title registration forms are circulated to all
CARG Editors for commenting on.Editors evaluate
potential reviews using the following criteria: the topic of the review is
within the scope of the group; the rationale for doing the review is clear and
relevant; completion of the review appears feasible.
After the title has been approved by the CARG Editors,
and the Review Group Co-ordinator has excluded
potential duplication of work or conflicts of interest with other Cochrane
groups, the title is registered.
Authors are then notified of the title registration and receive support
materials including:
1. 'Tips
for Authors' which contains:
a. guidelines
b. information on the editorial process
c. examples
d. references
e. checklists for protocol/review submission
2. RevMan information and CD-ROM, if
requested
3. A
contact ID
4. Information
on how to download the Cochrane
Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions;
5. The
Cochrane Basic Style Guide
6. The
RevMan help exercise.
All authors are subscribed to the Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group's mailing list to keep them
up-to-date on Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group
activities, and are encouraged to contact the Review Group Co-ordinator with any questions or concerns.
The editorial office requests that the protocol is
submitted to the editorial office within three months of title registration, or
the title may be withdrawn or allocated to another reviewer.
'Instructions for Authors' is also available on the Cochrane
Anaesthesia Review Group's web-site:
http://www.carg.dk
POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
It is the policy of the Anaesthesia Group for authors
to state explicitly in the text of their review any identified or potential
conflicts of interest. Authors are referred to the Collaboration's policy on
sponsorship: http://www.cochrane.org/docs/commercialsponsorship.htm for
additional information about the various different types of conflict of
interest (i.e. financial, association with industry etc). If the authors are
also contributing authors of one of the original trials included in their
review, they should state this clearly in their CARG review. If authors are not
aware of any potential conflict of interest they should state: 'none known'.
If a member of the editorial team is a author of a CARG review they are excluded from editorial
decisions on the review in which they are a contributor. Editorial
responsibility will be given to one of the other editors in the Anaesthesia Group.
OPEN EDITORIAL PROCESS:
The Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group has adopted an
open editorial process. All members of the editorial team are now named. Their
original comments are forwarded unblinded onto the
authors along with the content editors' plan of action. Peer referees are sent
the same set of editorial comments. The peer reviewers
contribution to the editorial process is now mentioned in the acknowledgement
section of the review.
Protocols and reviews are prepared using the Cochrane
Collaboration's Review Manager software (RevMan),
which is available on CD ROM from the editorial office or can be downloaded
from http://www.cochrane.org/cochrane/revman.htm). Authors who do not have the
computer capability to access RevMan should contact the editorial office.
The Review Group Co-ordinator
acknowledges receipt of the protocol in the editorial office, and forwards the
protocol, along with guidelines for editing ('Tips for editors and peer
referees') to the assigned Cochrane Anaesthesia
Review Group content editor, consumer panel and at least two peer referees. The
content editor, consumers and peer referees evaluate and comment on the review
title, background, objectives, the selection criteria, the search strategy, the
methodology and the language of the protocol.
The peer referees and, consumers are asked to return
their comments within 14 days of receipt of the protocol. Their comments are
then forwarded onto the content editor for collating into one document. The
content editor is asked to return that plan within 28 days.That
document should provide a plan of action for the author to follow. (In cases
where the differences of opinion amongst the editor and peer referees are
great, the Co-ordinating Editors will be called upon
to resolve the disagreement.) The Review Group Co-ordinator
forwards that plan of action along with all original editorial comments, and
copy-editing suggestions, to the author, who makes the necessary revisions. The
reviewer is asked to return the revised protocol to the editorial office within
28 days of receipt of the content editor's plan of action. We ask that authors
submit a copy of the revised protocol in Review Manger (RevMan 4.2) with all
changes marked in red; a tracked changes document and a detailed covering letter
describing the changes made to the protocol. Authors are reminded that they are
entitled to ignore suggestions made by editors, but are expected, however, to
answer all the comments and criticisms (in the covering letter) even if they do
not agree with them. The revised protocol and covering letter are again
forwarded to the content editor for further evaluation. Peer referees do not
see the protocol again until it reaches the draft review stage. Peer referees
will be sent a copy of all editorial comments for their interest. When the
content editor has approved the protocol it is forwarded to CARG's
Co-ordinating Editors for final publication approval.
When this approval is given, the protocol is submitted to the Cochrane Library
for publication.
'Tips for editors and peer referees' is also available
on the Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group's website
The editorial office requests that the review is
submitted to the editorial office within six months of publication of the protocol.
The Review Group Co-ordinator
acknowledges receipt of the review in the editorial office, and forwards the
review, along with guidelines for editing ('Tips for editors/peer referees') to
the same Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group content
editor and peer referees who evaluated the protocol, plus a consumer
representative and a Statistical editor.
It is again expected that all editorial comments be
returned to the editorial office within four weeks of receipt of the review. All
editorial comments are forwarded to the content editor for collating into one
document. That document should provide a plan of action for the author to
follow. (In cases where the differences of opinion amongst the editor and peer
referees are great, the Co-ordinating Editors will be
called upon to resolve the disagreement.) The Review
Group Co-ordinator, will forward that plan of action,
along with all original editorial comments and copy-editing suggestions, to the
author, who will make the necessary revisions. The author is asked to return
the revised review to the editorial office within 28 days of receipt of the
content editor's plan of action. We ask that authors submit a copy of the
revised protocol in RevMan(with changes marked in
red); a tracked changes document and a detailed covering letter describing the
changes made to the review. Authors are reminded that they are entitled to
ignore suggestions made by editors, but are, however, expected to answer all
the comments and criticisms (in the covering letter) even if they do not agree
with them. The revised review and covering letter are again forwarded to the
content and statistical editors. Peer-referees do not see the review again, they are sent a copy of all editorial comments for
their interest.
'Tips for editors and peer referees' is also available
on the Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group's website:
http://www.carg.dk
Authors are expected to include new trials and update
their reviews every two years or in response to criticism.
The editorial office will provide each author with
additional references within the scope of the review from the specialized
register every two years. The same Cochrane Anaesthesia
Review Group editor who evaluated the protocol and review will edit the updated
review in the same manner.
Reviews, which remain unrevised for more than two
years will be flagged automatically as such in The Cochrane Library. If the
author does not update the review, it may be re-allocated or withdrawn from The
Cochrane Library.