Factors predicting completion and time to publication of Cochrane reviews

Ref ID 6
First Author A. C. Tricco
Year Of Publishing 2009
URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3090115/pdf/OpenMed-03-e210.pdf
Keywords Cochrane
General medical
Problem(s) Unpublished or "zombie" reviews (the file-drawer effect)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