The following slides were presented at a meeting of potential editors and methods advisors for the proposed Cochrane review group in February The slides were designed to promote discussion rather than represent the views and directions of this group.

Role of advisory groups in supporting content of reviews

Role of review advisory groups The Cochrane Handbook  to help reviewers outline the parameters of their review so that the end product reflects the needs of end users establishment and management (lead author) can be difficult and potentially time-consuming Advisory groups are not intended to be another layer of peer-review. Nor are they intended to assist with technical review support (e.g. statistical or methods expertise)

Members of review advisory groups Consumers (those with whom the intervention/s under review are targeted) Content experts Policy-makers Practitioners (those implementing the intervention/s under review)

Opinions asked of RAG members Does the review question seem to capture the essence of the topic under review (is it of interest and potential 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 are potential important confounders that should be extracted from the primary studies at data collection stage? Are the needs of people from all countries considered appropriately in the review? Are all relevant outcomes of interest to you included in the review?

Recruiting advisory group members Should editors play a role in recruiting advisory group members and peer referees? How do we recruit advisors and referees (including consumers) with the appropriate skill and knowledge to provide useful advice to authors? At what stage should RAG members be sought advise - title rego or draft protocol stage?