This thread has been split from here It's after 5:30 on the last day of November, and there doesn't seem to have been any update to the Cochrane review. Edit - they added a new statement: https://www.s4me.info/threads/30th-nov-cochrane-have-not-approved-publication-of-the-larun-re‐submission-but-old-version-not-withdrawn-either.6990/ They have just published this, which seems of some relevance to us: Cochrane's plans to update its COI policy: truth and fiction https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.ED000131/full
This Cochrane statement is very relevant to us, given the exercise review on the face of it would seem a prime example of their current approach getting it very wrong. If Cochrane retract the exercise review and if they manage to get the conflict of interest policy right it will at least put moral pressure on NICE to get their similar failings sorted. But it is still hard to know how big an 'if' this is.
I'd say it's a good move for the better on Cochrane's part, will be interesting to see how it plays out in reality.
@TiredSam's comment was tongue-in-cheek I'm certain, as he also will be very aware who the bell ringer was.
But I could never have whipped out the source document with the ruthless speed and efficiency of @JohnTheJack, plus before today I had assumed that Michael Sharpe was just boasting about being able to balance on a horse.
Haven't read the statement yet, but even the title is revealing, about the internal processes within the organization. The need to publish something with the words "truth and fiction" in the title, is what you do to stop harsh debate spinning out of control - instead of activily including people in the discussion from the start, and beeing open.
Yup with credit to @TiredSam for the horse theme if one were a very rude person one could take it further and say “Sharpe is a horse’s arse”
I was merely speculating as to what a rude person might say @Barry. Nevertheless I am happy to apologise to any horses’ arses that may have been offended.
