Separate Rejected titles from Vacant Titles
As an ME I want to clearly separate rejected titles from vacant titles, so author teams do not contact me in vain.
In the Vacant Titles folder, titles are either filed under Active or Inactive. Review authors often contact to ask if they can take on one of the titles listed under Inactive. This is misleading because in some cases the rejected titles are listed under this heading.
Possible changes: either change the heading from Inactive to Rejected titles, or add a new status (and heading) for Rejected titles?
It will help to keep a list of rejected titles and reasons they were rejected to track the ME's workload.
Having consulted with ME Support on CRGs’ needs for storing and sharing information on Vacant titles, is clear that we need to clearly flag Rejected titles separately inside Archie.
Work on this may be impacted by/impact the work on the central list of Priority Review.
Could consider including this idea: http://ideas.cochrane.org/forums/252906-archie/suggestions/6390875--proposed-title-heading-in-archie-that-is-not-pub
Voted “Important” by ADAC, Case Number: 128599 Comments:
Emma Sydenham commented
Another important and related issue is that vacant titles can be seen by others with an Archie account, within Archie, but the titles are not available to the public. It is unfair for people with Archie accounts to be able to see vacant titles whereas members of the public (i.e. other potential authors) cannot.
Jordi Pardo Pardo commented
there is a small but significant amount of authors (usually encourage by Centres) that actively look in the vacant title section of Archie. When a title is suggested and it under discussion, it commonly goes to Vacant titles to start tracking in Archie it's life. If title is rejected, it will stay there as you will like to keep our records of the discussion in Archie. Having a clear separation will help authors asking for titles have been declared not relevant or not feasible by the group.