 |
 |
It may be of interest to remind, that mining the trials from EMBASE to CENTRAL was a very early activity in CC in 1990s (I have a good memory of times when it was a Collaboration) and it was definitely for the good of all and CENTRAL was open to every body. Then the activity was shut (I should like to learn from some one with better memory - why) and restored under the new conditions. Probably the participants just missed the point of the turn. Vasya On 2016-05-04 11:08, Jon Brassey wrote: > 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) >> ************************************************************************* Vasiliy V. Vlassov, MD President, Society for Evidence Based Medicine (osdm.org) e-mail: vlassov[a t]cochrane.ru snail mail: P.O.Box 13 Moscow 109451 Russia Phone Russia +7(965)2511021 Подпишись на новости на osdm.org -- THANK YOU for deleting my e-mail address , any other addresses, and any personal information, from this e-mail, if you plan to forward it. Also, thank you for using “Bcc” instead of “To” and “Cc“ when initiating both individual and group e-mails. These extra actions on your part help to prevent spammers and hackers from obtaining addresses and thus help prevent the proliferation of spam.