4.2.4      Dates

There are several dates associated with a Cochrane review.  Some of these are automatically generated by RevMan, and some need to be entered by the review author.  These dates are important both to inform readers of the review and to facilitate management of review publication.  It is essential that authors apply these definitions when entering dates into relevant fields during an update or amendment to a review.

 

For considerations to make when updating a review please see Chapter 11 ‘Updating and maintaining reviews’. 

 

4.2.4.1       Assessed as Up-to-date

This date is entered by review authors for full reviews only (not protocols).  On publication, this date is reproduced in a prominent place in the review to inform readers of how recently the review has been assessed as up to date.  The criteria for assessing a review as up to date are listed in Box 4.2.a.

 

A review might be considered to be up to date even if it has received only minimal edits for many years, for example if a recent search for studies identifies no new evidence since the review was published.  All reviews submitted for publication must include a date on which the review was last assessed as being up to date.  The date should be entered by the authors, and will often coincide with the date on which the authors submit the review for consideration to be published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.  It may be appropriate to amend the date on approval of the review for publication. 

  

Box 4.2. a: Guidance for declaring a review as being up to date

The date a review is assessed as being up to date must be chosen so that the review (new, updated or amended) meets the following key criterion:

 

1. The evidence is up to date on the performance of the test(s)

The list of included studies should include all available evidence, and should result from a most recent search typically being within six months of the date on which the review is assessed as being up to date;

 

In addition, it is highly desirable, but not mandatory, that

 

2. The methods of the review are up to date

All mandatory methods for Cochrane reviews (as described in the current version of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy) should be incorporated;

 

3. Factual statements are correct

Factual statements, for example, in the Background and Discussion, should not be unreasonably out-dated.

  

 

 

4.2.4.2       Date of search

This date is entered by review authors for full reviews only (i.e. not protocols)‘Search’ here refers to the searches of all the databases searched for the reviewIf different databases were searched on different dates, the most recent date of the search for each database should be given within the text of the review and the earliest of the dates should be put in this fieldFor example, if the most recent searches of the following databases were on the following dates (MEDLINE 5 June 2007, EMBASE 12 June 2007 and CENTRAL 28 June 2007) the ‘Date of search’ would be 5 June 2007For further details on how to document your searches please see Chapter 7.

 

4.2.4.3       Next stage expected

 This is entered by review authors as:

• For protocols: the date on which the full review is expected (e.g. in 1 year);

• For full reviews: the date on which the next update is expected (e.g. in 2 years). 

 

4.2.4.4       Protocol first published, Review first published, Last citation issue

These dates are automatically recorded in RevMan and generated at the time of publication of the protocol or full review.