Caroline Struthers' correspondence and blog on the Cochrane Review: 'Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome, 2017 and 2019, Larun et al.

Hi All

Here's the latest from my now year-old complaint about the Editor-in-Chief. I referred it to COPE because Cochrane refused to investigate it. I then re-referred it to COPE because Cochrane has no documented procedure to handle allegations of editorial misconduct. COPE wrote to me yesterday to say that, "as they understand it", Cochrane does have at least one documented procedure to deal with such allegations, and they gave the example of the conflict of interest referral panel. So I forwarded the original complaint to them (coiarbiter@cochrane.org), text in italics below.

Hi there

I am making this allegation in a personal capacity and not as a representative of my employer.

This is a forwarded complaint about Karla Soares-Weiser’s editorial misconduct. I originally sent this to the complaints email address, as instructed by Catherine Spencer, on 23 March 2023.

Catherine consulted the Co-chairs at the time, and they decided there would be no investigation of my allegation.

COPE stipulates that allegations of misconduct should be taken seriously https://publicationethics.org/misconduct, so I complained to COPE that my allegation had not been investigated, and Cochrane had no process in place to investigate allegations of editorial misconduct.

COPE wrote to me again today to say that, as they understand it, Cochrane does have at least one process to investigate allegations of editorial misconduct. They gave the Research Integrity and COI referral process as an example. https://training.cochrane.org/onlin.../coi-policy/referrals-conflict-interest-panel.

Please refer this allegation to the Research Integrity Editors and let me know the timeline for an investigation.

With best wishes

Caroline
 
Today I received an email from Jordi Pardo Pardo (interim Cochrane chair) saying once again Cochrane are not going to investigate my allegation of misconduct because a year ago the then Co-chairs of the board had determined my allegation overlapped with a previous complaint about errors in the review. The outcome of that investigation was that there were no serious errors in the review.

So I edited and re-submitted my original complaint of misconduct, explaining, once again, that it didn't overlap with my complaint about errors in the review, because the alleged misconduct occurred before the review was published. I used Cochrane's brand new complaints form https://www.cochrane.org/complaints/form.

 
Caroline Struthers said:
Today I received an email from Jordi Pardo Pardo (interim Cochrane chair) saying once again Cochrane are not going to investigate my allegation of misconduct because a year ago the then Co-chairs of the board had determined my allegation overlapped with a previous complaint about errors in the review. The outcome of that investigation was that there were no serious errors in the review.

So I edited and re-submitted my original complaint of misconduct, explaining, once again, that it didn't overlap with my complaint about errors in the review, because the alleged misconduct occurred before the review was published. I used Cochrane's brand new complaints form https://www.cochrane.org/complaints/form.

Click to expand...


Thank you for your perseverance @Caroline Struthers

It definitely feels that Cochrane’s refusal to address the issues around the ME/CFS exercise review is now a deliberate strategy of delay and obfuscation.
 
Sent to Cochrane yesterday in response to their asking to confirm I can be named in the complaint so they can "move it forward"

15 May 2024

Yes you can name me. Although I don't see why it's necessary.

I have submitted this complaint of editorial/publication misconduct three times.

1. To Catherine Spencer in March 2023. It was specified at that time that complaints about the Editor in Chief should be addressed to the CEO, and there was no mention of being able to submit a complaint anonymously
2. After questioning whether Cochrane had a suitable procedure for investigating allegations of misconduct, I was advised by COPE to resubmit the complaint through the Research Integrity Panel route https://training.cochrane.org/onlin.../coi-policy/referrals-conflict-interest-panel.
3. Jordi Pardo Pardo wrote to me on 1 May and said that the previous co-chairs Ms. Catherine Marshall and Prof. Tracey Howe had considered my complaint and determined that "the matters raised related to aspects of the publication which had already been reviewed and closed the matter" As my complaint is about misconduct of an individual not "aspects of a publication" and cites evidence of misconduct which has never been seen before, I submitted it once again through the new complaints procedure only in place since April 2024 https://community.cochrane.org/news/new-complaints-procedure-cochrane

The "history" of this complaint only goes back just over a year. My email to the Editor in Chief in November 2020 alleged there were serious errors in two reviews and requested that they should be withdrawn for patient safety. This was not a complaint, it was a request to withdraw two reviews because of errors in them. This was investigated and a panel decided there were no serious errors in the reviews. The 2020 request to withdraw two reviews because of errors in them is unrelated to an allegation of misconduct occurring before the publication of a review. Please can you confirm that you have understood this important distinction?

Thanks
Caroline

On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 8:25 AM Complaints <complaints@cochrane.org> wrote:
New reply for your query (ticket #COMP00164156)

Dear Caroline,

Thank you for your reply.

As you have previously submitted this complaint through other avenues within Cochrane we are unable to process this complaint against the previous decision as anonymous.

Please could you confirm if we can name you in this complaint so we can move it forward?

Thank you.
Kind regards,
Cochrane Complaints
 
Deanne NZ said:
Is that the most eloquent way of saying “we don’t give a F*@K about your complaint” ever?
Click to expand...
It's not very original as they keep cutting and pasting the same sentence from previous correspondence. It will be interesting if they say I can't appeal the decision of two individuals who have never provided any reasoning for their decision and left the board very soon after they made it, and had been "written to" by the Charity Commission.
 
Caroline Struthers said:
I've appealed the decision to close the case, and they have to send it to an appeals board. I've asked who will be on the board, and to please ensure that EiC and CEO are not on it.
Such fun
Click to expand...
Very excitingly, I've found a new organisation to complain about Cochrane to - the Fundraising Regulator - who knew they existed?! I had never even heard of them before, but they are mentioned in the new Cochrane complaints procedure as a recourse if you're not happy with the outcome of a complaint.

I wrote to Cochrane to ask why their new complaints procedure didn't appear to have followed the Fundraising Regulator's guidance. https://www.fundraisingregulator.org.uk/more-from-us/resources/complaints-handling-guidance

I also submitted a complaint to the Fundraising Regulator itself (I realise now it's rather badly worded). I attached the original complaint to my submission and other documents which I hope will make the history of the complaint clear. As Cochrane's main source of funds is the money from selling its reviews, if they knowingly produce substandard products which could harm patients, and continue to sell them when they know they are substandard, it is a breach of their charitable objectives.

upload_2024-5-23_22-22-25.png

upload_2024-5-23_22-28-15.png
 
Caroline Struthers said:
I wrote to Cochrane to ask why their new complaints procedure didn't appear to have followed the Fundraising Regulator's guidance. https://www.fundraisingregulator.org.uk/more-from-us/resources/complaints-handling-guidance
Click to expand...

Have been away for a bit, and received this from Cochrane on Monday in response to my appealing their decision (pasted below)

New reply for your query (ticket #COMP00164156)

Dear Ms Struthers,

This case is closed, and we will not be establishing an appeals board for this complaint. Our policy at the time of your complaint was that requests for review be received in writing no later than one month after the decision was received, and our current policy requires appeals to be made within 30 days. We note that you were informed of that decision in April 2023.

In regard to your comments about the guidance of the Fundraising Regulator, this was a complaint related to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We note that the relevant external body for editorial-related complaints, COPE, has already addressed Cochrane's processes in relation to this complaint.

We have noted your requests for further information. We will notify you when there are relevant further public reports about complaints related to this review.

Kind regards,
Cochrane Complaints.

upload_2024-5-23_22-22-25-png.21898
 
Caroline Struthers said:
I also submitted a complaint to the Fundraising Regulator itself
Click to expand...

And I received the following from the Funding Regulator on Monday in response to my complaint to them.

Dear Ms. Struthers,

Thank-you for contacting the Fundraising Regulator to report your concern about The Cochrane Collaboration. From reviewing the information, I don’t think this is a complaint which falls within our remit. I would like to explain why in further detail.

Your complaint

You have explained: “I am concerned that the charity is prioritising its own reputation over its beneficiaries by refusing to investigate an allegation of editorial misconduct which has led to a misleading and substandard publication. Trust in the editorial process and sales of publications is the charity's main source of income so allegations of editorial misconduct potentially leading to a misleading publication and harm to patients should be taken seriously. The charity has refused to investigate my complaint thoroughly and independently.”

Our role and remit

Part of our role is to investigate complaints from members of the public about charitable fundraising practice where these cannot be resolved by the fundraising organisations themselves. We do so by considering whether the fundraising organisation has complied with the Code of Fundraising Practice (the code), which outlines the legal requirements and best practice expected of all charitable fundraising organisations across the UK. Where poor fundraising practice is judged to have taken place, we can make recommendations for remedy and implement changes to the code.

The information you have provided indicates that your concern is about what you consider to be poor decision-making within the charity in relation to one of its income revenue streams. This would be considered a matter of governance in relation to how the charity is seeking to achieve its charitable objectives, rather than fundraising activity. Therefore, your complaint is not within our remit to consider.

Next steps

It’s not unusual for us to see complaints that fall outside of our scope. In these cases, we try to signpost complainants to the appropriate body or alternative regulator who may be able to help.

In this instance, you may wish to report your concerns to the Charity Commission for England and Wales. You can do so via its website: https://www.gov.uk/complain-about-charity

I’m sorry we were not able to assist directly on this occasion, and I hope the information provided above is useful.

Kind regards

upload_2024-5-23_22-28-15-png.21899
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom