The editorial process of the Cochrane Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders (CMED) group involves several stages:
Anyone who would like to do a review within the scope of the CMED group should first contact the Managing Editor. After negotiations on the proposed title, review authors will submit a title registration form, which includes a detailed questionnaire on the proposed review. The proposed title will be circulated within the wider Cochrane to identify common interests and overlaps. Review authors will have to provide information of possible conflicts of interest in the title registration form.
Once the title has been accepted, review authors are encouraged to attend a workshop on protocol development, if they have not already done so. Review authors will receive a standard protocol template. Protocol drafts must be checked into Archie (the Cochrane's Information and Management System) for editorial approval, after careful proof-reading and consideration of the embedded protocol submission form. The protocol undergoes a refereeing process. Every effort will be made to complete the refereeing process as quickly as possible. Once the protocol draft appears acceptable the CMED group's Information Specialist (CIS) will negotiate the establishment of appropriate search strategies with review authors. The Managing Editor will then provide the collated comments received and ask the review authors to make appropriate changes to the protocol. Once the comments have been satisfactorily addressed, the final protocol will be proof-read, copy-edited (in consultation with the review authors), approved by the Co-ordinating Editor and submitted for inclusion in the Cochrane Library to the publisher. Review authors will have to submit a signed licence for publication form and an updated conflict of interest form via 'Archie' before publication.
Note: there is a maximum of two attempts for protocol submission to adequately address all editorial comments. Otherwise, the protocol might be rejected or transferred to another review author team.
Once the protocol has been accepted, the review authors will receive a standard review template and proceed with preparing the final review. The CIS will sent search results for databases available at the editorial office to review authors and establish a continuous email alert service using the original search strategy for MEDLINE. The final review draft must be checked into Archie for editorial approval and will undergo a refereeing process. Once comments have been satisfactorily addressed, the final review will be proof-read, copy-edited (in consultation with the review authors), approved by the Co-ordinating Editor and submitted for inclusion in the Cochrane Library to the publisher. Review authors will have to submit a signed up-to-date licence for publication and conflict of interest form via 'Archie'.
Note: there is a maximum of two attempts to adequately address all editorial comments per phase, including careful consideration of the embedded review submission form. Otherwise, the review might be rejected or transferred to another review author team.
- Review update
The CMED group utilises a priority system for all reviews published within its scope in the Cochrane Library. For top priority reviews the CMED group will actively scan the literature after publication of the review to identify new publications providing information about patient-important outcomes, long-term trials and novel adverse events. In this case review authors will be contacted and should proceed to update their review as soon as possible. If the Editorial Base recognises that a priority review has become significantly out-of-date and the responsible review authors do not take appropriate action, the CMED group may consider to either transfer responsibility for the review to a third party or to withdraw the review from the Cochrane Library. In all other cases review authors must contact the CMED group to discuss relevant changes to the scope of their review (such as amending eligibility criteria, search methods, risk of bias and analysis) before embarking on a review update. Review authors will then have to discuss with the CMED group if a non-priority review update will be feasible because of priority settings and most likely very limited support from the CMED group. Review authors will be responsible for scanning the medical literature to identify any newly published trials within the scope of their review and to update their review according to the newest CMED group's standards.