A new Cochrane Library Special Collection provides an overview of Cochrane Reviews that summarize the potential benefits and harms of deprescribing specific medications and help to inform how to implement deprescribing across different settings and populations.

This collection of reviews highlight that deprescribing is likely feasible and safe and can lead to benefits in prescribing and clinical outcomes. However, they also highlight significant gaps in the literature and methodological challenges to both conducting deprescribing studies and systematic reviews of deprescribing.

• View the Cochrane Library Special Collection
• Visit the Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare website
• Free Webinar: From Evidence of Overuse to De-implementation

Catherine joins Cochrane from The Seafarers’ Charity where she held the position of CEO.

Governing Board Co-Chairs, Tracey Howe and Catherine Marshall said: "We are delighted to welcome Catherine to Cochrane. Catherine is a proven Chief Executive with an exceptional record leading non-profit organisations. She brings expertise in strategic planning, change management, and communications under pinned by a global perspective. Catherine is well positioned to partner with the Editor-in-Chief, Karla Soares-Weiser, to lead Cochrane as we drive an exciting programme of delivering trusted evidence, promoting informed decisions, and better health.”

Prior to her role at The Seafarers’ Charity, Catherine was acting Chief Operating Officer and Director of Communications and Change Management at international public health research organisation, icddrb, in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Between 2008-2015 Catherine held various senior management roles at the Army Families Federation, including three years as Chief Executive.

Catherine Spencer said, “Like all organisations post-Covid, we have challenges to deal with, but I see so much opportunity for Cochrane in the future. I look forward to what will inevitably be stimulating conversations with the Cochrane Community about what a thriving future Cochrane looks like and what we need to do to achieve that as we build a long-term strategy together.

I spent three and a half years working at icddr,b, in Dhaka, Bangladesh - a large public health research organisation, that at the time was facing enormous financial and structural challenge. Working as part of the Senior Leadership Team, and very closely with the Executive Director and Board, the organization was rejuvenated, meaning its essential public health research could continue. Thus, I come to Cochrane familiar with an organisation managing change and I look forward to working with you, collaboratively to steer Cochrane to success.”

Catherine will meet with the Cochrane Community in two introductory webinars to accommodate different time zones. Invites will be sent directly to Community Members via email.

• Read Catherine's full bio

Specifications: Full Time (Permanent)
Salary: circa £40,000 per annum
Location: Ideally based in the UK, Germany or Denmark. Candidates from the rest of the world will be considered; however, Cochrane’s Central Executive Team is only able to offer consultancy contracts outside these countries (1-year fixed-term contracts)
Application Closing Date: 7th September 2022

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.

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 locations are possible for the right candidate. Please note, however, that we are only able to offer consultancy contracts outside of the UK, Germany or Denmark.

We will consider extended notice periods if required for applicants who wish to honour existing contracts. We fully support remote and flexible working arrangements. 

How to apply

• For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here. 
• The deadline to receive your application is by 7th September. 
• 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.
• Read our Recruitment Privacy Statement

Specifications: Permanent
Salary: £45,000 per annum
Location: UK
Application Closing Date:  17 July 2022

To provide strategic support to deliver cross-departmental objectives and targets by:

• Working closely with the Editorial Product Lead and the methods community to deliver on activities so Cochrane can produce and publish a variety of evidence synthesis types and other content that align with Cochrane’s strategy for review production and meet Cochrane’s mission.
• Coordinating the development of best practice resources for Cochrane’s methodological standards.
• Leading on editorial and methods projects to develop Cochrane’s platforms and processes.
• Being the main point of contact for the methods community and engaging with Methods Groups, the Methods Executive and Methods Network to facilitate their involvement with Cochrane.

The Methods Implementation Editor will provide strategic editorial and methods support to departments across Cochrane and the methods community to enable efficient, high-quality review production for a variety of types of evidence syntheses and methods. Overall, this role will contribute to streamlining and simplifying review production and publication to support Cochrane’s efficiency and sustainability as an organisation.

How to apply

• For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here.
• The deadline to receive your application is by 17 July 2022.
• 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.
• Read our Recruitment Privacy Statement

Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare and Choosing Wisely Canada invite you to join a free live webinar where leading experts discuss the challenges of abandoning existing low-value care practices, which may not be beneficial or even cause harm to patients. Ideal for healthcare professionals, guideline developers, and policy makers.

Experts will share experiences on how to address the urgency of finding out when and how de-implementation, de-intensification of medical interventions, and diagnostics should be undertaken, without causing harm to patients, de-professionalizing clinicians, or counteracting shared decision-making processes.

 10 Oct 2022
4:00pm - 5:30pm CET (View in your time zone) 
View agenda
Register for free

Speakers:

• Dr. Minna Johansson, Cochrane Sustainable Healthcare  and Cochrane Sweden
• Dr. Wendy Levinson, Choosing Wisely Canada
• Dr. Jeremy Grimshaw, Choosing Wisely Canada
• Dr. Nicolaas Sieds Klazinga, OECD Health Care Quality Indicator

Specifications: 12 months Fixed term/Consultancy contract dependant on location
Salary: £42,000 per annum
Location: Flexible
Application Closing Date:  12 August 2022

Cochrane requires a talented internal communications specialist to contribute to the development and implementation of a complex, organization-wide transformation and change management programme to be rolled out over the next 12 months. The key focus of this varied role will be creating and delivering a strategic internal communications plan to support our ongoing transformation programmes. This will involve creating and disseminating clear, informative and engaging content (including online news and social media posts, videos and e-newsletters) for the Cochrane community and the many diverse audiences within it.

Cochrane manages a large number of websites and social media channels. The organisation also uses a digital marketing database for targeted mailings and newsletters; and can segment audiences to ensure effective communication.

This role would suit an individual who embraces change; whilst understanding how to convey key messages to stakeholder groups impacted by this change.

Cochrane is a global network of more than 115,000 people, and our internal community accounts for around 1,000 of those people. This role will need to work effectively across the internal community network, demonstrating excellent cross-cultural working. 

How to apply

• For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here. 
• The deadline to receive your application is by 12 August 2022. 
• 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.
• Read our Recruitment Privacy Statement 

Is ivermectin effective for COVID‐19? Updated Cochrane review 'Ivermectin for preventing and treating COVID‐19'

Key messages

• We found no evidence to support the use of ivermectin for treating COVID‐19 or preventing SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. The evidence base improved slightly in this update, but is still limited.
• Evaluation of ivermectin is continuing in 31 ongoing trials, and we will update this review again when their results become available.  

What is ivermectin?
Ivermectin is a medicine used to treat parasites, such as intestinal parasites in animals, and scabies in humans. It is inexpensive and is widely used in regions of the world where parasitic infestations are common. It has few unwanted effects.  

Medical regulators have not approved ivermectin for COVID‐19.

What did we want to find out?
We wanted to update our knowledge of whether ivermectin reduces death, illness, and length of infection in people with COVID‐19, or is useful in prevention of the infection. We included trials comparing the medicine to placebo (dummy treatment), usual care, or treatments for COVID‐19 that are known to work to some extent, such as dexamethasone. We excluded trials comparing ivermectin to other medicines that do not work, like hydroxychloroquine, or whose effectiveness against COVID‐19 is uncertain.

We evaluated the effects of ivermectin in infected people on:

• people dying;
• whether people's COVID‐19 got better or worse;
• quality of life;
• serious and non‐serious unwanted effects;
• viral clearance.

For prevention, we sought the effect on preventing SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and COVID‐19 disease.

What did we do?
We searched for randomized controlled trials that investigated ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID‐19. People treated in hospital or as outpatients had to have laboratory‐confirmed COVID‐19.

In this update, we also investigated the trustworthiness of the trials and only included them if they fulfilled clear ethical and scientific criteria.

We compared and summarized the results of the trials and rated our confidence in the evidence, based on common criteria such as trial methods and sizes.

What did we find?
We excluded seven of the 14 trials included in the previous review as these trials did not fulfil the expected ethical and scientific criteria. Together with four new trials, we included 11 trials with 3409 participants that investigated ivermectin combined with any usual care compared to the same usual care or placebo.

For treatment, there were five trials of people in hospital with moderate COVID‐19 and six trials of outpatients with mild COVID‐19. The trials used different doses of ivermectin and different durations of treatment.  

No trial investigated ivermectin to prevent SARS‐CoV‐2 infection.

We also found 31 ongoing trials, and an additional 28 trials still requiring clarification from the authors or not yet published.

Main results  

Treating people in hospital with COVID‐19

We do not know whether ivermectin compared with placebo or usual care 28 days after treatment:

• leads to more or fewer deaths (3 trials, 230 people);
• worsens or improves patients' condition, assessed by need for ventilation or death (2 trials, 118 people);
• increases or reduces serious unwanted events (2 trials, 197 people).

Ivermectin compared with placebo or usual care 28 days after treatment, may make little or no difference to:

• improving patients' condition, assessed by discharge from hospital (1 trial, 73 people);
• non‐serious unwanted events (3 trials, 228 participants). 

Seven days after treatment, ivermectin may make little or no difference to reduction of negative COVID‐19 tests (3 trials, 231 participants) compared with placebo or usual care.

Treating outpatients with COVID‐19
Ivermectin compared with placebo or usual care 28 days after treatment, probably makes little or no difference to people dying (6 trials, 2860 people).

Ivermectin compared with placebo or usual care 28 days after treatment, makes little or no difference to quality of life (1 trial, 1358 people).

Ivermectin compared with placebo or usual care 28 days after treatment, may make little or no difference to:

• worsening patients' condition, assessed by admission to hospital or death (2 trials, 590 people);
• serious unwanted events (5 trials, 1502 people);
• non‐serious unwanted events (5 trials, 1502 participants);
• improving people's COVID‐19 symptoms in the 14 days after treatment (2 trials, 478 people);
• number of people with negative COVID‐19 tests 7 days after treatment (2 trials, 331 people).

Review authors, Dr Maria Popp and Dr Stephanie Weibel said:

“Overall, the outlook for ivermectin’s use to treat or prevent SARS-CoV-2 is poor. While laboratory results showed some promise, real-life outcomes suggest no or very little impact on mortality rates, illness, and length of infection.”

What are the limitations of the evidence?
Our confidence in the evidence, especially for outpatients, improved since the last review version, because we could look at more participants included in high‐quality trials. Although we are quite certain regarding our results on risk of people dying and quality of life, the confidence in the evidence is still low for many other outpatient and inpatient outcomes because there were only few events measured. The methods differed between trials, and they did not report everything we were interested in, such as relevant outcomes.

How up to date is this evidence?
The systematic literature search is up to date to 16 December 2021. Additionally, we included trials with > 1000 participants up to April 2022.

• Link to updated review
• Link to Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine news item

Specifications: 20 hours/week until 31 December, 2022
Salary: £1,500 per month
Location: Flexible Location, Remote Work
Application Closing Date:  3 July, 2022

The Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group is currently looking for a Graduate Research Assistant with experience in rapid or systematic reviews for 20 hours/week (temporary position until December 31, 2022).

Required qualifications:

• Graduate or PhD student in the field of health care (medicine, public health, biology, psychology, nursing science etc.)
• Good understanding of rapid reviews
• Experience in conducting systematic reviews
• Excellent writing skills in English (C1)

Tasks: 

• Support the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group (CRRMG) in providing rapid review guidance for the Cochrane Handbook, the Rapid Review Methods Guidance, and journal publications
• Support the CRRMG with scheduling and preparing workshops
• Communicate and collaborate with various other groups at Cochrane (e.g., editorial team)

Benefits:

• Flexible working hours
• 100% remote working possible

The successful candidate will be hired by Cochrane Austria at the University for Continuing Education Krems, Austria. The salary will be 1500 EUR per month. All applications must be submitted by Sunday, July 3, 2022 per email at office@cochrane.at

Please include: 

• Curriculum vitae
• Cover letter
• Certificates

If you have any questions, please contact Sandra Hummel (office@cochrane.at).

We look forward to hearing from you! 

In this free course, learn how you can talk about vaccines with anyone!

Just because you’re a researcher, clinician, or  scientist doesn't mean that you should know everything about viruses and vaccines…but you may be asked to talk about them! It's important to remember that these conversations aren’t just about facts and information. They can be an opportunity to build trust and advocate for science! ‘How to talk about vaccines when you’re not an expert’ is a free Lifeology course that walks you through practical tips that you can apply next time you’re asked about the topic.

Lifeology’s tagline is ‘The place where science and art converge’. They offer a platform that brings together scientists, artists, and storytellers to help people better understand and engage with science, health information, and research. One of the main ways they meet their objectives is through beautifully illustrated, evidence-informed, bite-sized ‘flashcard’ courses about science and health-related topics aimed at the general public and students. There have been other collaborations with Cochrane on courses, including ‘What is an infodemic and how can we prevent it?’ and 'How to communication scientific uncertainty.'

“This course was inspired by real events – and one many can relate to!” explains author Muriah Umoquit, Cochrane’s Communications and Engagement Officer. “I baked 7 dozen cookies and found myself at a cookie exchange…where everyone was against the COVID-19 vaccine. As a professional health communicator, I felt like I should educate them with the latest studies and dazzle them into being pro-science over our appetizers! But instead, I froze. And when the subject changed, I left. It was a missed opportunity and one that many researchers and scientists find themselves in. This course gives practical advice to draw from, so we can all be more confident in our conversations about vaccines or other health or science conversations.”

The course has  22 cards that share the story of a systematic reviewer asking their colleague for advice when talking about vaccines. It features the art of Abbey Morris. “When creating the illustrations, I made a conscious effort to use inclusive imagery and avoided adding any text that would hinder future language translations,” Abby explains. “I also hope the Cochrane Community will enjoy some  hidden ‘Easter Eggs’ in this course just for them!”

Ruobing Li researches vaccine hesitancy at the Alan Alda Centre for Communicating Science and also collaborated on this project with us by  reviewing the content. “Sharing science is not just about sharing facts and information. This course is short, practical in its advice, and really accessible. Trust in science isn’t built in one conversation; I hope this course will encourage and give confidence to all scientists and researchers to have many conversations!”

Having a course that would be assessable in multiple languages was also built into its design. Juan Franco, Cochrane Board Member, family physician, researcher, and Editor-in-Chief of Evidence-Based Medicine was another reviewer of this course. "Muriah and her colleagues designed this course knowing that we wanted to make it assessable to a global audience through our amazing Cochrane Translation Teams" Juan explains. "For this reason, we provided feedback to be sure to avoid words in the illustrations, cultural-specific analogies or phrases, and complex words. The end result makes for a great course in any language!"

View the Lifeology course ‘How to talk about vaccines when you’re not an expert' in:

• English
• German
• Malay
  
• Spanish

Learn more about Lifeology: 

• Interview with Lifeology
• Lifeology website
• Lifeology on Twitter
• Lifeology on Instagram
• Lifeology on Slack

We spoke to Cochrane Oral Health Author Terry Simpson about the updated review Treatment of periodontitis for glycaemic control in people with diabetes mellitus. He explains the results of this review and what it means for the research community as well as medical, nursing, and dental professionals - with thanks also to Josh Twigg, Ambrina Qureshi, Sarah Wild, Ian Needleman and Laura MacDonald.

Terry, can you tell us about this updated Cochrane Review?
Our review of studies evaluating the impact of treatment of periodontitis (gum disease) on glycaemic control in people with diabetes was originally published in 2010 (based on a protocol published in 2004) and first updated in 2015. For the 2022 update, we divided the review in two due to the sheer volume of studies on this topic and to account for the clear divide that has emerged in the research, focusing on two different key questions. This update answers the question: how does treatment of periodontitis compare to usual care or no treatment for improving glycaemic control in people with diabetes; the second part of the update will compare different approaches to treatment of periodontitis against one another, to assess if there is a gold standard for treatment.

This first part of our update found that glycaemic (blood sugar) control in people with diabetes can be improved with treatment of periodontitis. The improvement in diabetic control from treating any periodontitis appears to be approximately equivalent to the threshold for determining effectiveness of an additional diabetes drug - but without the side effects.

What does it mean for the research community?
For the first time since this review began, we have shown that we do not need to conduct further randomised controlled trials that compare periodontal treatment against no treatment or usual care in people who have both diabetes and periodontitis. Within the population of people with diabetes, there is the potential for individuals to improve glycaemic control through treating their periodontitis and therefore we recommend that research should not withhold periodontal treatment from such people for the purpose of a research study that is highly unlikely to add new information to the evidence base. Trials comparing different approaches to periodontal treatment may still be useful, while qualitative studies and process evaluations will be helpful to establish how best to optimise the provision of effective periodontal treatment in primary care settings and to support patients to improve their periodontal health and oral hygiene practices.

Given the evidence is clear, what needs to change?
As treatment of periodontitis in people who also have diabetes can have a beneficial effect on metabolic control (glycaemic levels), it is important that there is better communication between dental and medical professionals managing patients with diabetes and periodontitis as this will facilitate appropriate treatment to minimise risk of complications of diabetes. Unfortunately, care pathways between diabetes and oral health do not exist for most patients. Therefore, healthcare policy and guidance are needed to establish such funded pathways.

For dental professionals, greater awareness is required regarding effective monitoring and treatment of diabetic patients with periodontitis. Professional development for all relevant healthcare staff (including diabetologists, other medical and nursing teams dealing with diabetic patients and the dental professionals) must be delivered to transfer knowledge, address barriers and support implementation. Partnering with organisations that provide information and support for people with diabetes and oral health would be helpful.

Governments may wish to review how socially funded health schemes are addressing the need for periodontal care, particularly among people with diabetes, where the potential for improvement in health and quality of life may be profound. The role of periodontal specialists in providing training and advice on referral for further management is critical in ensuring the dental workforce is equipped to manage this group of patients to the best standard.  

Groups formulating guidelines on diabetes or periodontitis should incorporate the findings of our review so that appropriate educational resources are available for professionals and patients. In the UK, we are aware that NICE have already undertaken this responsibility.

How can clinicians working in this field change what they do?
Medical and nursing professionals should ask all patients diagnosed with diabetes whether they have had a dental visit to get their gums checked and to emphasise the importance of gum health in diabetes management. They can signpost or refer their patients to dental professionals in the case of any unusual presentation or poor oral health identified during general screening on follow-up visits. Similarly, dental professionals (dentists and hygienists/therapists) can advise all patients with diabetes of their increased risk of gum disease and the benefits of good gum health for their overall health and wellbeing. Regular screening of gum health should continue to be provided to all patients, with detailed assessment for those identified at risk of periodontitis. Most patients will continue to be suitable for treatment under the care of a general dentist. However, for people with more severe gum disease and where gum disease is not responding to treatment, referral to a specialist (periodontist) should be considered where available.

Dental and medical professionals can familiarise themselves with the evidence about the links between periodontitis and diabetes. Both professions can assist in the process of educating patients about this relationship. Dentists can play a role in screening for diabetes, considering the possibility of undiagnosed diabetes in patients with risk factors (such as increasing age, higher BMI, non-white ethnicity, family history of diabetes) and the presence of periodontitis, particularly when the condition is severe. They should be able to inform patients of local options for testing for diabetes.

Where can clinicians find out more?

• Our Cochrane Review
• New NICE guidance
• NHS England commissioning standards for dental services for people with diabetes
• The Scottish Dental Clinical Effectiveness Programme leaflet for patients Diabetes and Your Oral Health: Prevention of Gum Disease
• The British Society of Periodontology leaflets about gum health:
  
  • Gum Health Awareness (for patients)
  • Gum Health Awareness: Health Care Professionals (for healthcare staff)
• Diabetes.co.uk online article Diabetes and Dental Health
• Mouth Healthy online article Diabetes and Your Smile

JBI, Cochrane, Campbell, GIN, the Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, the Centre for Evidence-based Health Care, and NICE recently launched the World Evidence-Based Healthcare (EBHC) Day 2022 campaign, ‘Partnerships for Purpose’. 

World EBHC Day is held on 20 October each year. It is a global initiative that raises awareness of the need for better evidence to inform healthcare policy, practice and decision making in order to improve health outcomes globally. It is an opportunity to participate in debate about global trends and challenges, but also to celebrate the impact of individuals and organisations worldwide, recognising the work of dedicated researchers, policymakers and health professionals in improving health outcomes.

The 2022 campaign aims to examine partnerships and practical considerations around establishing different types of partnerships, accelerating innovation, ensuring equity and integrity, overcoming challenges and biases, lessons learned and achieving impact for improved health outcomes globally.

There is a growing concern, which was heightened during the pandemic, about making partnerships and collaboration equitable for — and beneficial to — all partners. Although willingness to collaborate has increased, vested interests, bureaucracy and inability to change remain limiting factors. Around the globe, organisations have set up networks, task forces and working groups to coordinate efforts and overcome some of these challenges.

Cochrane’s Editor in Chief, Dr Karla Soares-Weiser says, 

"Partnerships are at the heart of evidence-informed healthcare, and I am very proud of the work Cochrane does with our partners. As a global evidence community, we know that we need to work together to coordinate efforts and make the best use of limited resources. Working together is also an opportunity to listen to and learn from other perspectives, ultimately to benefit the health of all worldwide. I look forward to the discussions that this year’s World EBHC Day campaign on partnerships for purpose will generate."

World EHB Day Events

• Talking the walk: equity in global health partnerships 
  
  • 19 October 2022
  • Free webinar
  • In this 90-minute moderated discussion we will hear from key global experts who challenged the status quo of what ‘equity’ means in global health partnerships, including open and engaging conversations with participants.  Includes Tamara Kredo, Deputy Director and Chief Specialist Scientist at Cochrane South Africa. 
• Making health decisions: what’s best for you?
  
  • 20 Oct 2022
  • Free webinar
  • Hosted by Cochrane UK, this webinar will equip you with some questions and considerations that you can reflect on and discuss with a healthcare professional – to help you make the best health decision for you.
• Cochrane and Partnerships
  • 20 Oct 2022
  • Free webinar
  • Hosted by Cochrane US Network, this webinar will focus on why partnerships are important across the spectrum - from your own life to healthcare policy and practice. Come hear from three Cochrane Board members and three Cochrane US mentees.

Cochrane World EBHC Day Blogs

• Maximize your organisational partnerships by considering these 5 essential points 
  
• NICE and Cochrane: Working together 
• Cochrane First Aid: Using partnerships to reach practitioners and laypeople
• Building capacity through partnership: the cochrane affiliate program at tufts university school of medicine
• Want more free time for research? Try a partnership approach! 
• Facilitating the dissemination of evidence-based practice: cochrane rehabilitation blogshot translation

Cochrane World EBHC Day Vlogs

• Visit the World EBHC website
• #WorldEBHC on Twitter

Specifications: Part time 22.5 hours (Permanent/Consultancy role considered)
Salary: £45,000 per annum full time equivalent
Location: Flexible
Application Closing Date:  27 June 2022

The Evidence Production and Methods Directorate in Cochrane is made up of three departments that are responsible for the efficient and timely publication of high-quality systematic reviews in the Cochrane Library. One of the three departments is the Methods and Evidence Synthesis Development team.

The Methods Support Unit (MSU) sits in the Methods and Evidence Synthesis Development team. The MSU provides hands on statistical and methods support to people preparing Cochrane systematic reviews. As Statistical Editor, you will provide advanced methods support and advice as requested by the Methods Support Unit Manager, from members of the Cochrane community directly or via  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 you 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 27 June 2022. 
• 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 11 July 2022
• Read our Recruitment Privacy Statement 

Specifications: Permanent
Salary: £52,000 per annum
Location: UK
Application Closing Date:  27 June 2022

The Evidence Production and Methods Directorate in Cochrane is made up of three departments that are responsible for the efficient and timely publication of high-quality systematic reviews in the Cochrane Library. One of the three departments is the Methods and Evidence Synthesis Development team.

The Methods Support Unit (MSU) sits in the Methods and Evidence Synthesis Development team. The MSU provides hands on statistical and methods support to people preparing Cochrane systematic reviews. As lead for the Methods Support Unit, you will be responsible for ensuring that people preparing reviews for publication in the Cochrane Library have access to current advice about the implementation of systematic review methods, including searching, statistical analysis, and bias assessment. The team comprises a Systematic Review Methodology Editor, a Statistical Editor and an Information Specialist. Additional budget will be made available to fund additional methods expertise as may be required.

The Methods Support Unit Manager will be responsible for ensuring that methodological and statistical queries from the Evidence Synthesis Development Editors, Editorial Service or Cochrane Support Team are addressed. The role will require a formal qualification related to systematic review methods.

How to apply

• For further information on the role and how to apply, please click here. 
• The deadline to receive your application is by 27 June 2022. 
• 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.
• Read our Recruitment Privacy Statement 

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 programme 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: Filip Wikström
Location: Lund, Cochrane Sweden
CIM location: Barcelona, Cochrane Iberoamerica

How did you first learn about Cochrane?
The Cochrane Learning Modules are integrated into the Medicine Programme in Lund University, so I was gradually exposed to the Cochrane Methodology over several semesters. I think reading and assessing past research is an invaluable skill to have, so I was very glad to get the opportunity to do my Master’s Thesis with Cochrane.

What was your experience with Cochrane International Mobility?
My experience with the international mobility program was fantastic. The researchers at Cochrane Iberoamerica were very welcoming and I look back very fondly to the weeks I spent there. I learned a lot about systematic reviews but I also got to know amazing researchers and the projects they were working on.

What are you doing now in relation to your Cochrane International Mobility experience?
Currently I am contributing to a Cochrane Review on Tumor Necrosis Factor alpha inhibitors, under the supervision of Michele Compagno and Matteo Bruschettini (both based at Lund University). In the future I aspire to collaborate on more Cochrane projects.

Do you have any words of advice to anyone considering a Cochrane International Mobility experience?
Based on my own experience, I would advise anyone who likes systematic reviews to consider the program. It is a great opportunity to meet passionate researchers and work in an international environment. I got new perspectives on Cochrane methodology but also experiences that I think are important on a personal level.

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: Agata Stróżyk
Location: Warsaw, Poland
CIM location: Lund, Cochrane Sweden

How did you first learn about Cochrane?
I first got a chance to better know what systematic reviews are and what the role of Cochrane is when I was participating in the Evidence-Based Medicine faculty at my university. Systematic reviews are critical in summarizing clinical evidence and Cochrane is the most methodologically rigorous at doing it! In Poland, we call the Cochrane Handbook our Bible for systematic reviews.

What was your experience with your virtual Cochrane International Mobility?
To be a part of a Cochrane systematic review was definitely on my to-do list. I was looking for any opportunity to be involved in Cochrane for about two years. I was a supporter at Cochrane TaskExchange and Cochrane Crowd. Finally, I contacted Matteo at Cochrane Sweden, who involved me in a systematic review that was already ongoing. Thus, I didn’t have to go through all process, but from the beginning of my traineeship, I had to do specific tasks. Matteo and Giovanni Cagnotto (also based at Lund University) were my supervisors and are very friendly, kind, patient, and supportive at each step, but also very motivating and fast-working – that was a great experience!

What are you doing now in relation to your Cochrane International Mobility experience?
At the moment, we hope to complete our systematic review, “Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis”, in a couple of weeks. For sure, I will use what I’ve learned to do methodologically better systematic reviews in the future. Moreover, I will still look for other opportunities to be a part of the Cochrane community, and maybe one day to prepare a new Cochrane systematic review within my area of expertise.

Do you have any words of advice to anyone considering a Cochrane International Mobility experience?
If you are interested in systematic reviews, I think it is a highly desirable step to participate in any kind of traineeship supervised by Cochrane. For any medical practitioners and researchers who would like to better understand the critical appraisal of evidence and its translation into practice, I think it’s a great option too. My personal advice: do not give up, if you do not get any response for the first time! Be persistent in chasing your dreams

New Review published: Digital technologies to help people with asthma take their medication as prescribed

Asthma is one of the most common long-term conditions worldwide. There are effective medicines available to treat symptoms, such as inhalers containing steroids. However, for best effect, maintenance medication need to be taken as prescribed. Many people do not take their medication, due to busy schedules and the belief that medication is only needed short-term. This is known as 'non-adherence', which can lead to more symptoms and attacks. Non-adherence is a major health problem; achieving adherence is very important to prevent attacks and reduce the risk of death. In healthcare there is increasing use of digital interventions such as mobile phones, text messages, and 'smart' inhalers that can feed back information about medication-taking. However, there is limited evidence on whether these technologies work to improve asthma medication-taking or improve symptoms.

This review aimed to find out whether digital technologies really work to improve asthma medication-taking, and whether this improved adherence leads to improvements in asthma symptoms and other benefits.

Study characteristics

We found 40 studies including more than 15,000 adults and children with asthma. Studies ranged from about 2 weeks to 24 months' duration, so we cannot say whether these methods are effective in the long term (a long period of years). We searched multiple information sources to identify relevant studies. This review is current as of June 2020. Looking at the data, we aimed to find out whether digital technologies helped people with asthma to take their medication as prescribed, and whether people who used the technology had better asthma control, and fewer asthma attacks, than those who did not use the technology.

Key results

People with asthma who were given the digital technology to support asthma medication-taking were better at taking their medication as prescribed compared to people who did not get the technology; 15% more people (likely to be somewhere between 8% and 22%) took their medication as prescribed when they received the digital technology, compared to those who did not (who took their medication on average 45% of the amount prescribed).

Importantly, people who got the digital technology had much better asthma control and half the risk of asthma attacks (likely somewhere between 32% and 91%), which has direct benefits for reducing the risk of asthma-related deaths. We saw improvements in quality of life and lung function, but the effect on lung function was small and may be of limited clinical relevance.

No improvements were seen in unscheduled healthcare visits. There was not enough information to tell us about the effect of digital technologies on time off work or school or the cost-benefits, nor whether there are any harms. Technologies were generally acceptable to patients. Certain types of technologies such as 'smart' inhalers and text messages seemed to be better for improving medication-taking than other technology types, although the small number of studies means we cannot be certain that these technologies definitely work better than others.

Quality of the information

There is some uncertainty about our results because the studies were quite different from each other. These differences mean that we cannot be completely sure what the real benefit is, as the benefits may be due to other factors not directly related to the technology - for example, being involved in a study can improve medication-taking. Sometimes the studies did not give us enough information for us to include them with the other studies to work out their effectiveness. We had concerns about a quarter of the studies where people did not finish the study, and we were uncertain whether studies reported everything they measured.

Practising GPs and authors on this Cochrane review Anna De Simoni and Chris Griffiths discuss using apps and digital tools with patients with asthma, they explain,

"The evidence in this review gives us more confidence to discuss their use. From this review we know electronic adherence monitors and text messages can help patients make more informed choices."

Key message

The studies we found suggest that digital technologies may help people with asthma take their medication better, improve their asthma control, and potentially halve their risk of asthma attacks, compared with people who did not get the technology. Certain types of digital technologies, such as text-message interventions, may work better than others. However, we have some uncertainties about the quality of the information reported in some studies, and the small number of studies for the different technology types, which means we cannot be 100% certain of their benefits.

Author Amy Chan explains,

 “Digital technologies that aim to improve medication taking can increase people taking their medication in way it has been prescribed by 15%, and improve asthma control and quality of life. Technologies that use text messages or electronic adherence monitors appear to be particularly effective for improving people taking their medication as prescribed.”

• Read the full review
• Visit the Cochrane Airways website