ORRCA is a collaborative project and to date 30+ individuals from across the world have helped review abstracts and full text articles, assessing eligibility and categorising relevant literature for inclusion on the database.
We are always looking for more people to join and help with the literature review. As well as supporting knowledge development within the trials community, joining the ORRCA review team is a great way to become familiar with the literature and develop methodological research experience.
Teleconference training and written guidance are given to all reviewers to ensure a consistent and high quality approach. Following training, reviewers are assigned batches of either 500 abstracts or 50 full text files. You can complete as many files as you want and can be involved in either the abstract review, full text review or both. You can also specify whether you would prefer to assess recruitment and/ or retention articles depending on your research interests.
Full text review requires a strong understanding of methodological research. In order to assess inclusion criteria and correctly categorise literature reviewers need to be able to identify and separate out details of the recruitment/ retention research from the clinical trials within which the research is embedded. We would therefore recommend people with limited methodological experience start with the reviewing abstracts.
Abstract reviewers need to have an understanding of clinical trials and awareness of issues surrounding recruitment or retention. Methodological research experience is an advantage, but with training and ongoing support, abstract review provides a good opportunity for people who wish to gain further experience in this field. Abstract review is therefore a good starting point for first year PhD students, research assistants or trial managers who are newer to methodological research.
If you would like to join the team please send a CV or brief outline of your research experience to firstname.lastname@example.org
We are incredibly grateful to the following team of reviewers who have helped make this project possible.
Abstract Screening: A. Kearney1, Dr N Harman1, Dr A Jones1, B Conroy1, N Bacon1, A Rosala- Hallas1, M, Blundell1, E. Gkioni1, Dr. F. Sherratt1, Dr J Wade4, O Noreiko, E.N Stanhope8, R Cooper1, Dr S Duane9, T Conway9, Dr L Murphy10, L Butlin11, C O’Nions16, Dr S Sindi12,A Humphries16, Dr S Lensen13, A El Feky2, Dr P A Ashford14, D M Gaunt4, R Newlands2, Dr A Vellinga9, H Delaney6, A Hunter, L Beasant, and C McWillaims16.
Full text review and categorisation of articles: Dr N Harman1, Prof. C Gamble1, A Kearney1, Dr K Woolfall1, E. Gkioni1, H. Gardner2, A El Feky2, Dr K Gillies2, Dr L Maguire3, Dr L Rooshenas4, Dr N Mills4 , C Rowlands4, S Paramasivan4, J Dooley4, J Wade4, D Elliot4, S Husbands4, W. Cragg5, L Biesty6, Dr S Duane6, P Healy6, A Vellinga6, ,C Beecher6, K Bracken7 , Dr T Isaacs15 , L. Boone17 and C O'Nions16,
1North West Hub Hub for Trials Methodology Research/ University of Liverpool, 2University of Aberdeen, 3Queen's University, Belfast, 4University of Bristol, 5MRC CTU, 6HRB-Trials Methodology Research Network 7 NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney 8University College Birmingham, 9National University of Ireland,Galway10 University of Limerick, 11Cardiff University, 12Karolinska Institute, 13MRC CTU at UCL, 14Norwich CTU, University of East Anglia, 15UCL Institute of Education, Univeristy College London, 16University of Liverpool, 17Vanderbilt University Medical Center
This work is supported by the Medical Research Council (MRC) Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research (MR/L004933/1– B2) and the Health Research Board Trials Methodology Research Network .