The detailed description of the task are as follows:

Phase 1: The Protocol (Months 1–6)

Before we look at a single trial's results, we must publish our "rules of engagement." This prevents us from changing our mind later to make the data look better.

• Defining PICO: We must specify exactly who counts (e.g., only adults? only children?), what the intervention is (e.g., specifically a 10-minute blood test), and what success looks like (e.g., total prescriptions written vs. actual clinical recovery).

• Search Strategy: We will work with a Cochrane Information Specialist to write a "Search String"—a massive, complex list of keywords used to scan databases like PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL.

• Peer Review: The Protocol itself will be peer-reviewed and published.

Phase 2: The Search & Screen (Months 6–9)

Once the protocol is live, you hit "Go" on the search.

• The "Haystack": Our search might return 8,000 to 12,000 abstracts.

• Sifting: Two authors must independently read every single title and abstract to decide if it fits your PICO. If anyone disagree, a third author breaks the tie.

• Full-Text Review: We’ll likely whittle those thousands down to 50–100 papers that you must read in full to ensure they meet your strict quality criteria.

Phase 3: Data Extraction & "Risk of Bias" (Months 9–15)

This is the most labor-intensive part of the task.

• Extraction: We will create a massive spreadsheet (or use RevMan) to pull data from every study: How many patients? What dose? How many got antibiotics? What were the side effects?

• Risk of Bias (RoB 2): We must judge the quality of every study. Did the doctors know which patient got the test? Was the randomization truly random? If a study is "low quality," its data will carry less weight in your final result.

Phase 4: The Meta-Analysis (Months 15–18)

This is where the math happens.

• Pooling Data: We have to use a statistical method to combine the results of all the small studies into one giant "Forest Plot."

• Heterogeneity: we have to calculate I^2 to see if the studies are too different to be compared. If I^2 > 75%, you have a problem—the studies are telling very different stories.

• GRADE Assessment:  To provide a "Certainty of Evidence" (High, Moderate, Low, or Very Low) to each outcome.

   

   

Phase 5: Writing & Final Peer Review (Months 18–24)

• Plain Language Summary (PLS): We will write a version of our findings that a regular patient or a journalist can understand.

• The "Editorial Gauntlet": The Cochrane Group will tear the draft apart, checking every calculation and every citation. It may take 2 or 3 rounds of heavy revisions.

The Workload Reality

• Team Size: Usually 8 to 10 people.

• Software:  RevMan Web, COVIDENCE, GRADE pro

• Evidence-Based Medicine: We will not just say that "antibiotic misuse is bad." We will find out the process "How to reduces antibiotic initiation by 22% (95% CI 18% to 26%) with high-certainty evidence.”