Talk:Cochrane Collaboration: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Petréa Mitchell
(Article checklist)
imported>Subpagination Bot
m (Add {{subpages}} and remove checklist (details))
Line 1: Line 1:
{{checklist
{{subpages}}
|                abc = Cochrane Collaboration
|                cat1 = Health Sciences
|                cat2 =
|                cat3 =
|          cat_check = n
|              status = 1
|        underlinked = y
|            cleanup = y
|                  by = [[User:Petréa Mitchell|Petréa Mitchell]] 12:22, 29 April 2007 (CDT)
}}


=Rationale for the article=
=Rationale for the article=

Revision as of 05:17, 26 September 2007

This article is developed but not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition Group of volunteers who review the effects of health care interventions tested in biomedical randomized controlled trials. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Health Sciences [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English

Rationale for the article

There is one thing possibly wrong with this entry, The Cochrane Collaboration is a portal to subscription only databases. The abstracts can be viewed for free and there is a feedback process for the reviews available to the public. However, it is not unlike PubMed wherein most references are available in full by subscription or pay-per-article. While we assiduously try to avoid promoting commercial efforts, the bottom line is that most research is in some ways only available for a price, though often through nonprofit sources. It is also true that the Cochrane Library Databases have become one of the largest of the highest quality databases for research in medicine. With these factors in mind, it is simply not possible to pretend it is not there but to present this effort as objectively as possible. Thomas Simmons 04:10 9 April, 2007 (EPT)


Review and EBM Guidelines

EBM guidelines are presented here from a free-access, highly reputable, international source rather than the Chochrane Collaboration specifically because the Cochrane Library, while not-for-profit, does not make their work available - they let it out through distributors here. Cochrane Inside, Wiley and Sons here "promotes, sells and distributes the English language version of EBM Guidelines on behalf of Duodecim worldwide" Meanwhile, taxpayers in the USA have graciously allowed us to read a much larger database by reputable sources on a vast array of topics. Thomas Simmons 13:04, 9 April, 2007 (EPT)