Refer to Cochrane Review proposals
Cochrane Reviews need to adhere to the standard formats for Cochrane Review titles, as set out in Table 4.2.a of the Cochrane Handbook.
Non-standard titles are automatically alerted to the Cochrane Editorial & Methods Department, where they will be considered alongside current guidance for title structures in the Cochrane Handbook. The Cochrane Editorial & Methods Department may suggest alternative title formulations, but the final decision on a title rests with Cochrane Review Groups.
The completed review proposal form should give the editorial team the information necessary to make an initial decision on the title. Criteria to consider are the:
Managing Editors who circulate the form by email to editors for consideration must remove the authors’ email addresses in section 1.
Managing Editors can register the proposal in Archie as a Vacant Title at this stage if required.
If the CRG does not wish to pursue work on this topic, please contact the authors promptly. Other options are to:
If the CRG would like to accept the title, the Managing Editor needs to:
The CRG will need to evaluate the authors’ submitted declarations of interest in relation to the Cochrane conflict of interest policy, and resolve any relevant conflicts with the author team. If the editorial team has queries about implementing the policy, contact Managing Editor Support (firstname.lastname@example.org).
If there are unresolvable conflicts of interest:
If the team can proceed:
By submitting a review proposal form, the authors have given Cochrane permission to process the data it contains.
All authors should create Cochrane Accounts before completing this form. All authors will have Archie records. The CRG should not need to collect any additional personal data from authors.
As mentioned above, when the Managing Editors completes the title registration, the Managing Editor will need to provide authors with instructions on adding Affiliations to their Archie records.
Accepted titles: save the review proposal form as an attachment to a workflow or to a note on the review properties. If the CRG saves these forms elsewhere, document the process.
Rejected titles: Managing Editors can choose whether tp delete or archive proposals for rejected reviews. If the CRGs chooses to store the form, ensure it is stored securely; for example:
Document the decision.
Refer to the sections in the review proposal forms.
Use the email addresses provided here, to identify authors’ accounts in Archie when allocating author roles.
Delete this section before circulating this form by email, e.g. to group editors.
Modify these sections as needed, to reflect the CRG’s priorities and criteria for accepting titles.
At proposal stage, authors are asked to confirm that they have read the Cochrane conflict of interest policy and to confirm if any author team members are potentially conflicted. They are advised to disclose potential conflicts at the earliest opportunity.
If the CRG is interested in accepting the title, the Managing Editor should request full Declarations of Interest in Archie. This is in accordance with conflict of interest policy that conflicts of Interest must be disclosed at title proposal stage. See Step 3: assess the authors.
CRGs should not need to collect any additional personal data from authors. See data protection above.
If the CRG registers the title, the Managing Editor should let authors know that they are entitled to free access to the Cochrane Interactive Learning modules. If the CRG identifies any additional author training needs in this section, refer authors to relevant Cochrane Training resources.