Criticism Management Advisory Group

Report to the Steering Group 

1. How many meetings, and of what type (e.g. face-to-face, by teleconference), has your Advisory Group had since March 2004?  
    
   We have had email contact only, since our tenure as Co-Convenor(s) is new. We will have our first face-to-face meeting at the Ottawa conference.     
    
   Is this what you expected when you set your budget for the year?  
   Because we are new Co-Convenor(s), we did not establish a budget at the start of the year, but intend to discuss one for the remaining one-half of this fiscal year, as well as a budget for the coming year.

2. Supply an up-to-date list of the members of your Advisory Group.  
   

Gordon Dooley, Lelia Duley, Cindy Farquhar, Suzanne Fletcher, Sarah Garner, Sonja Henderson, David Henderson-Smart, Bill Hersh, Andrew Herxheimer, Gillian Leng, John McDonald, David Moher, Maryann Napoli, Melissa Ober, Deborah Pentesco-Gilbert, Sherri Sheinfeld Gorin, Ida Sim, Silvana Simi. 

3. Summarise any significant actions taken by your Advisory Group since your last report, and significant actions planned between now and the next meeting of the CCSG in Providence in April 2005.  
    
   This is the first report of the new Co-Convenor(s). We reported the following findings to the IMSG in Copenhagen, on May 18, 2004:  
    
   As the new Co-Convenors of the CMAG, we sent three emails containing two proposals that were developed by Deborah Pentesco-Gilbert at John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. (“Wiley”) for the revision of Comments and Criticisms (C&C or “feedback”) as well as requests for suggestions to the workflow for comments and criticisms, barriers to using the C&C system, and suggestions for changes. Due to space restrictions, copies of the full report are available from the CMAG (ssg19@columbia.edu). 

These emails were sent to the members of the CMAG (N=17), former convenor, Chris Cates, to cag@cochrane.edu, and comcrits@cochrane.de. With the assistance of Melissa Ober of the US Cochrane Center, we sent a similar email to all of the listed criticism editors and review group coordinators (“master list,” N=123). The 123 persons on the “master list” overlap somewhat with the membership of the CMAG and well as other above-listed group emails; in addition, the “master list” itself contains some other email lists such as sfcc@itsa.ucsf.edu.  Overall, we received 14 responses by email. We also received a copy of the “Criticism Editor Handbook” (version 4.8) from Melissa Ober. Subsequent to the meeting with the IMSG, we received an additional response.   

The findings that we presented to the IMSG were copied from the emails that we received; few comments were endorsed by more than one respondent. The responses were organized by; barriers to the use of the current system, specific comments on the use of the proposed system(s),and general suggestions for change. We are particularly grateful for the assistance of Mike Clarke, Deborah Pentesco-Gilbert, Jini Hetherington and David Lefebvre in these initial efforts to improve the Comments and Criticisms area.  

Since March, 2004, Dr. Richmal Oates-Whitehead has resigned from the role of Co-Convenor; Dr. Sheinfeld Gorin will retain the post alone.  

Over the forthcoming full year, we intend to apply the results of the survey to proposals for change (as detailed forthwith). Within the context of a new IMS and our developing relationship with Wiley, our specific plans thus include: 

• Reviewing a revised prototype and a “cover sheet” for the C & C from Wiley
• Reviewing the criteria for an “Interim” site for C & C during site construction by Wiley
• Evaluating the distribution of C & C editors across review groups
• Formalizing the process of C & C, using the handbook and the survey findings as guides
• Enhancing uniformity of the role of the C & C editor
• Exploring criteria for longer-term archiving of C & C
• Developing “citation credit” for C & C to increase its use (undertaken in conjunction with Wiley)

4. Does your Advisory Group have any questions that you would like the Steering Group to answer?  If so, please list them.  
    
   None at present.

5. Does your Advisory Group wish to raise any problems, and recommended solutions, which you would like the Steering Group to discuss?  If so, please list them.  
    
   None at present.  
   
6. Do you foresee any problems in keeping within the budget you submitted for the current financial year (April 2004 to March 2005)?  This is to help in the Steering Group’s planning of expenditure over that time period.  
    
   We plan to explore the CMAG’s proposed budget for the last one-half of the current fiscal year and the forthcoming year with the  Steering Committee, particularly as the Convenor is based in the U.S..  
    
   

Sherri Sheinfeld Gorin

Convenor, CMAG

September 2004