Have you or someone you know experienced or been affected by receiving intravenous (IV) therapy through a catheter? Your input is needed on a review considering midline catheters versus peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) for people receiving intravenous therapy.
Skills / interests: Patient and public input
Would you be interested in helping us with this research article focused on midline catheters versus peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) for people receiving intravenous therapy?
I am looking for a patient or member of the public who would be willing to peer review this Cochrane systematic review “Midline catheters versus peripherally inserted central catheters for intravenous therapy in adults”.
When we say ‘patients and the public’, we mean patients and potential patients, carers, people who use health and social care services, and people or organizations that represent these groups.
We are interested if the language of the review, especially the language used in the Plain Language Summary (PLS), is accessible and if it feels relevant for those receiving intravenous therapy through a catheter, so it will be helpful to patients and members of the public making healthcare decisions.
We welcome feedback on any aspect of the review, noting particular focus and feedback for the PLS section. Our aim is for this to be a manageable task and not overburden our reviewers.
If you are interested in providing peer review, please include your e-mail address in your response. This will allow us to confirm your enrolment in our editorial management system (called Editorial Manager) and ensure that you can receive the review assignment.
Thank you in advance for your consideration!
Ideal applicant
Questions & comments
Cochrane