Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of 22 co-publications matched to 19 Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group systematic reviews

From: Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions

Study characteristics

N

(%)

Co-publication content compared to the CEVG review

  

 Identicala

3

(14 %)

 Similar but not identicala

14

(64 %)

 Abridgeda

3

(13 %)

 Otherb

2

(9 %)

Journal of co-publication

  

 Ophthalmology journal

12

(55 %)

  Indexed in Web of Science or Scopus as of publication date

11/12

 

 General or other medical journal

10

(45 %)

  Indexed in Web of Science or Scopus as of publication date

7/10

 

Authorship of co-publication

  

 Identical to CEVG review

11

(50 %)

 Same authors, different order

3

(14 %)

 One author added or removed

8

(36 %)

Co-publication timing

  

 Before the CEVG reviewc

5

(23 %)

 Within 2 years after CEVG review

14

(63 %)

 More than 2 years after CEVG review

3

(14 %)

Co-publication based on

  

 Original review

15

(68 %)

 Updated review

7

(32 %)

Citation of the CEVG review by the co-publication

  

 Cited

12

(55 %)

 Not cited, but CEVG review mentioned in the text

4

(18 %)

 Not cited or mentioned

6

(27 %)

Country of affiliation of co-publication first author

  

 UK

16

(73 %)

 USA

6

(27 %)

Number of included studies d

  

 Same as CEVG review

16

(73 %)

 Some overlap with CEVG review

6

(27 %)

  1. aIdentical is exact copy of CSR, Similar would be applied, for example, when the co-publication has a shorter methods section, and Abridged would be applied, for example, when the co-publication is a summary of the major findings from CSR
  2. bOf two co-publications classified as “Other”, one co-publication-CSR pair had no included studies and the authors discussed the characteristics of the condition; the second co-publication reported a subset of the interventions described in the CEVG review
  3. cFive CEVG reviews were published after the co-publications
  4. dNumber of included studies in co-publication: 4 had 0 studies, 6 had 1–4 studies, 6 had 5–9 studies, and 6 had ≥10