 |
 |
Dear all., It would be wonderful and fitting if Cochrane could take the lead in this as they have in so many areas regarding research availability, quality and community leadership. I also think this project showed phenomenal innovation and leadership, We in health care and medicine need well built citizen research exemplars to learn from. So many are watching. I know in some cases special collections are set up that are Open Access. This would be a strategic community relations gesture if Cochrane was to open this door and showcase what they and citizens have built together. It really is a first and the team have worked so hard. I hope the world will be able to see this and the magnitude of what they have accomplished, It will be an encouragement to all of us who value informed shared decision making and the respect of public and patient values in Health Care research. I hope this contribution will not be blocked, lost or die in obscurity behind an arbitrary paywall. Cochrane has always risen the the challenge against all odds and I expect this will be no exception. Best, Amy From: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Jon Brassey <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Reply-To: Jon Brassey <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Date: Wednesday, May 4, 2016 at 10:08 AM To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Re: Cochrane's EMBASE screening project - did you participate? Dear Nancy, We both agree on the amazing contribution of the volunteers. However, from there our positions diverge. The UNANIMOUS response (both on and off list) is disquiet about Cochrane's position on this matter. So I think an apology to volunteers is in order. Also, you ask about how to make the contributor experience as positive as possible. It's really simple, stop putting profit and control first. The volunteers have given their time for free to maximise health gain (not Cochrane-Wiley's profits) - so respect their views. I started this thread praising the aims of the project - I stand by this. And, if you do the decent thing and open up access, you'll have no bigger supporter than me. Best wishes jon On 4 May 2016, at 08:19, Nancy Owens <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Dear list members I am writing to respond to Jon's email, on behalf of Cochrane and the Embase project team, with the following message: We have always tried to be clear with what the Embase project set out to do, namely identify trials from Embase and feed them into Cochrane’s central database of controlled trials (CENTRAL). The description from the old platform and the new one says: Why is this task important? We need these citations screened. They feed a unique and very important product to the world of evidence based medicine: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL. This product helps us to find trials quickly and easily which in turn helps to answer vitally important questions about the effects of a treatment. The more up-to-date and comprehensive CENTRAL is, the more effective we can be in answering those questions quickly and accurately. Considered as a task on its own, it can be difficult to see just how important it is, but it is fundamental to what we do. Without identifying the trials, we cannot appraise them, assess them, meta-analyse them; we cannot accurately answer those questions about the effectiveness of new treatments or interventions. [http://crowd.cochrane.org/faq.html] Our volunteers have done, and continue to do, an amazing job with this task. They have helped to identify thousands of reports of randomised trials that we have been able to submit to CENTRAL. You are right, not everyone has access to CENTRAL but it is a resource used by Cochrane and Cochrane review authors worldwide to help them produce Cochrane reviews. If you are based in the UK you do have free access to CENTRAL. We’re in the process of rolling out our new platform: http://crowd.cochrane.org, so do go and take a look if you get a chance and let us know what you think and how we can make the contributor experience as positive as possible. Thanks and best Nancy Owens Nancy Owens Cochrane Communications and External Affairs -----Original Message----- From: Evidence based health (EBH) [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH automatic digest system Sent: 03 May 2016 09:01 To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Subject: EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH Digest - 1 May 2016 to 2 May 2016 (#2016-88) There are 4 messages totaling 649 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. Cochrane's EMBASE screening project - did you participate? (4) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 09:42:28 +0100 From: Jon Brassey <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Cochrane's EMBASE screening project - did you participate? Hi All, I was happy to see Cochrane's EMBASE screening project <http://community-archive.cochrane.org/news/news-events/current-news/embase-screening-project-six-months-old-and-going-strong> as it was an innovative project and used the power of the 'crowd' to identify controlled trials in EMBASE. As the project was powered by volunteers I was curious to what extent Cochrane would share these efforts. When asked I got this reply: *References to trial reports identified as part of the Embase Project are republished in CENTRAL under a licencing agreement between Wiley and Elsevier. As such, we are not permitted to share those records with any other parties.* If you took part in identifying trials through this project were you aware your efforts were going to be restricted and used solely at the discretion of Cochrane? I ask as typically, in the world of crowdsourcing, the efforts are for the wider public good (eg Wikipedia). It now appears volunteers are helping boost the profits of private companies. Am I the only one disturbed by this precedent? Best wishes jon -- Jon Brassey Director, Trip Database <http://www.tripdatabase.com> Honorary Fellow at CEBM <http://www.cebm.net>, University of Oxford Creator, Rapid-Reviews.info<http://rapid-reviews.info> ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 08:57:11 +0000 From: healingjia Price <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Re: Cochrane's EMBASE screening project - did you participate? I find this troubling, lack of transparency and wonder if volunteers knew. I was certainly not informed. Can any of you get into CDSR, we can't and we are Uk resident and Cochrane authors is the NICE Agreement still in place Best AMy Sent from my iPhone On May 2, 2016, at 9:42 AM, Jon Brassey <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Hi All, I was happy to see Cochrane's EMBASE screening project<http://community-archive.cochrane.org/news/news-events/current-news/embase-screening-project-six-months-old-and-going-strong> as it was an innovative project and used the power of the 'crowd' to identify controlled trials in EMBASE. As the project was powered by volunteers I was curious to what extent Cochrane would share these efforts. When asked I got this reply: References to trial reports identified as part of the Embase Project are republished in CENTRAL under a licencing agreement between Wiley and Elsevier. As such, we are not permitted to share those records with any other parties. If you took part in identifying trials through this project were you aware your efforts were going to be restricted and used solely at the discretion of Cochrane? I ask as typically, in the world of crowdsourcing, the efforts are for the wider public good (eg Wikipedia). It now appears volunteers are helping boost the profits of private companies. Am I the only one disturbed by this precedent? Best wishes jon -- Jon Brassey Director, Trip Database<http://www.tripdatabase.com> Honorary Fellow at CEBM<http://www.cebm.net>, University of Oxford Creator, Rapid-Reviews.info<http://rapid-reviews.info><http://Rapid-Reviews.info<http://rapid-reviews.info>> ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 12:41:44 -0500 From: Susan Fowler <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Re: Cochrane's EMBASE screening project - did you participate? Were you hoping to provide access via TRIP? Is that the issue? On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 3:57 AM, healingjia Price <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: I find this troubling, lack of transparency and wonder if volunteers knew. I was certainly not informed. Can any of you get into CDSR, we can't and we are Uk resident and Cochrane authors is the NICE Agreement still in place Best AMy Sent from my iPhone On May 2, 2016, at 9:42 AM, Jon Brassey <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote: Hi All, I was happy to see Cochrane's EMBASE screening project <http://community-archive.cochrane.org/news/news-events/current-news/e mbase-screening-project-six-months-old-and-going-strong> as it was an innovative project and used the power of the 'crowd' to identify controlled trials in EMBASE. As the project was powered by volunteers I was curious to what extent Cochrane would share these efforts. When asked I got this reply: *References to trial reports identified as part of the Embase Project are republished in CENTRAL under a licencing agreement between Wiley and Elsevier. As such, we are not permitted to share those records with any other parties.* If you took part in identifying trials through this project were you aware your efforts were going to be restricted and used solely at the discretion of Cochrane? I ask as typically, in the world of crowdsourcing, the efforts are for the wider public good (eg Wikipedia). It now appears volunteers are helping boost the profits of private companies. Am I the only one disturbed by this precedent? Best wishes jon -- Jon Brassey Director, Trip Database <http://www.tripdatabase.com> Honorary Fellow at CEBM <http://www.cebm.net>, University of Oxford Creator, Rapid-Reviews.info<http://rapid-reviews.info> -- Susan Fowler, MLIS Medical Librarian Coordinator, Systematic Review Services Evidence at Becker: http://beckerguides.wustl.edu/ebm Systematic Reviews Guide: http://beckerguides.wustl.edu/SystematicReviews Becker Medical Library, Washington University in St. Louis 314-362-8092 [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 18:55:40 +0100 From: Jon Brassey <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Re: Cochrane's EMBASE screening project - did you participate? I was thinking that the volunteers efforts could be maximised if their outputs were shared. So, inclusion of Trip (free version) would have been good. But there are lots of other initiatives which could have benefited. On 2 May 2016 at 18:41, Susan Fowler <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Were you hoping to provide access via TRIP? Is that the issue? On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 3:57 AM, healingjia Price <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: I find this troubling, lack of transparency and wonder if volunteers knew. I was certainly not informed. Can any of you get into CDSR, we can't and we are Uk resident and Cochrane authors is the NICE Agreement still in place Best AMy Sent from my iPhone On May 2, 2016, at 9:42 AM, Jon Brassey <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote: Hi All, I was happy to see Cochrane's EMBASE screening project <http://community-archive.cochrane.org/news/news-events/current-news/ embase-screening-project-six-months-old-and-going-strong> as it was an innovative project and used the power of the 'crowd' to identify controlled trials in EMBASE. As the project was powered by volunteers I was curious to what extent Cochrane would share these efforts. When asked I got this reply: *References to trial reports identified as part of the Embase Project are republished in CENTRAL under a licencing agreement between Wiley and Elsevier. As such, we are not permitted to share those records with any other parties.* If you took part in identifying trials through this project were you aware your efforts were going to be restricted and used solely at the discretion of Cochrane? I ask as typically, in the world of crowdsourcing, the efforts are for the wider public good (eg Wikipedia). It now appears volunteers are helping boost the profits of private companies. Am I the only one disturbed by this precedent? Best wishes jon -- Jon Brassey Director, Trip Database <http://www.tripdatabase.com> Honorary Fellow at CEBM <http://www.cebm.net>, University of Oxford Creator, Rapid-Reviews.info<http://rapid-reviews.info> -- Susan Fowler, MLIS Medical Librarian Coordinator, Systematic Review Services Evidence at Becker: http://beckerguides.wustl.edu/ebm Systematic Reviews Guide: http://beckerguides.wustl.edu/SystematicReviews Becker Medical Library, Washington University in St. Louis 314-362-8092 [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> -- Jon Brassey Director, Trip Database <http://www.tripdatabase.com> Honorary Fellow at CEBM <http://www.cebm.net>, University of Oxford Creator, Rapid-Reviews.info<http://rapid-reviews.info> ------------------------------ End of EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH Digest - 1 May 2016 to 2 May 2016 (#2016-88) *************************************************************************