- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Untimely (taking too long) or resource intensive
- Factors predicting completion and time to publication of Cochrane reviews
| Ref ID | 6 |
| First Author | A. C. Tricco |
| Journal | OPEN MEDICINE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2009 |
| URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3090115/pdf/OpenMed-03-e210.pdf |
| Keywords |
Cochrane Protocols General medical Currency |
| Problem(s) |
Unpublished or "zombie" reviews (the file-drawer effect) Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews Untimely (taking too long) or resource intensive |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 93 |
| Summary of Findings | 79% of the included 93 Cochrane review protocols in issue 2 (2000) of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were published as a final review by 2008. A change in authorship between publication of the Cochrane protocol and publication of the final review was associated with longer times to publication. |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | No |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |