In support of the work of authors and the editorial group, we have many people on our membership database who have indicated a willingness to peer review health promotion and public health reviews. Interests and areas of expertise are recorded to direct us to appropriate people when requesting reviewers for specific topics.
As of May 2018 we have had over 140 people acting as peer referees of a protocol or review with CPH. We are extremely grateful for this voluntary contribution.
A new Cochrane-wide peer review policy [link: http://community.cochrane.org/editorial-and-publishing-policy-resource/cochrane-review-management/cochrane-peer-review-policy] has been published in the Editorial and Publishing Policy Resource, 1 May 2018. This policy has been introduced with the aim of improving transparency in decision making, consistent with core Cochrane principles, standardising practice across Cochrane, and implementing best practice for peer review.
Review Advisory Group members
Review Advisory Groups are established by author teams to help review authors outline the parameters of their proposed review to ensure that the end product reflects the needs of its potential readers and users. Systematic reviews are likely to be more relevant to the end user and of higher quality if they are informed by advice from people with a range of experiences.
Examples of opinions sought from the review advisory group:
- Does the review question seem to capture the essence of the topic under review (will it sound interesting and useful to its target audience)?
- What interventions should be included in the review?
- Which populations should be included in the review and which should be excluded?
- What types of outcomes should the review include?
- How should equity issues be highlighted in the review?
- Are the needs of developing countries considered in the review?