January 2021 Editors’ choice

The monthly editorial by the co-editors in chief with each issue was instituted this journal at recommendation of Paul Glasziou, an board member, 1995. With a few exceptions where specific topic has been focus such as one on evidence arena [[1]Knottnerus J.A. Tugwell P. arena: multilevel playing field.J Clin Epidemiol. 2018; 102: v-viAbstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (3) Google Scholar], format mainly to group and summarise highlights paper. Over next months we have decided experiment different formats for editorial. In use approach that is used several high profile journals [[2]https://www.bmj.com/news/editor%27s%20choicehttps://www.elsevier.com/connect/what-makes-an-article-worthy-of-editorshttps://www.nature.com/collections/ktdfndgnljchoicehttps://aacrjournals.org/content/editors-pickshttps://crosstalk.cell.com/blog/topic/trends-editors-picksGoogle Scholar]. We note these content focuses ‘hot topics’, articles which new concepts or developing themes are highlighted, unexpected results overturn previous research presumptions. For JCE would add proof concept methods most likely impact/influence based practice, rigorous evaluation clinimetric performance methods; dissemination, uptake impact policy practice. highlighted below incorporate ways framing order it addresses contemporary concerns, include changing societal expectations. Series Evidence Based Research Lund et al. covers conceptual not new, but topical, necessary. three also represent present day containing important insights. maximise investment minimise waste, studies should address proven uncertainties build existing evidence. All too often happening. As early 2005 Lancet paper Ian Chalmers [[3]Chalmers I. Academia’s failure support systematic reviews.Lancet. 2005; 365: 469Abstract (23) Scholar] accompanying [[4]Young C. Horton R. Putting clinical trials into context.Lancet. 366: 107-108Abstract (133) pointed out identify, cite research. 2015 Network launched Statement laid their intent: persuade 6 stakeholder groups [researchers, funding agencies, regulators, editors reviewers, educators, patients consumers] avoid waste research, no be done without review. This held first meeting November 2020 [[5]Lund H. Brunnhuber K. Juhl Robinson Leenaars M. Dorch B.F. al.Towards research.BMJ. 2016; 355: I5440Crossref (53) -virtually very successful participation from many countries. series published line time meeting–and now describes two part process albeit both need considered outset. precede being conducted, irrespective whether primary secondary since frequently observed both. authors describe how identifying uncertainty necessary insufficient. New must questions its stakeholders, meaning engagement end user essential element. Finally, second described third article. reflects stage rarely practiced–placing context what previously known. therefore changes can twin challenges inappropriate duplication effort. It timely pertinent. Implementation not, however, given, remain. recent shown, links between trialists, synthesis researchers, health decision makers insufficient ‘impede optimal data’ [[6]Boutron Créquit Williams Meerpohl J. Craig J.C. Ravaud Future ecosystem series: 1. Introduction needs dramatic change.J 2020; 123: 135-142Abstract (5) addition, current note, insufficiently valued representing legitimate academic any case perceived unduly consuming process. Even incorporation review may challenged, some researchers believe trialists permitted reviews studies, fear they will able demonstrate sufficient neutrality. These all manageable proposed key steps toward minimising optimising value levels. Nothing less than future credibility sustainability might stake. Another identifies further areas exploration seem overdue highlight importance aligning appropriately change: Commentary Methods prospectively incorporating sex gender sciences Tadiri al.. Editors identified increasing top 10 active issues action retreat July 2020. agencies called studies; there little consensus amongst funders implement this, particularly respect diversity, proved challenging extremely report views GOINGFWD Consortium. argue numerous measurable gender-related variables influence individual population-level through various pathways, including identity, roles, relations norms They provide guidance around definition statistical analysis. major step forward, represents element broader growing equity