GCRI · Reports
Methods and publication process
This page sets out how Reports, published by The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI), takes a report from candidate to release: the review each edition passes, the standard its sources must meet and how versions and corrections are controlled. Every series follows this process, and each states any additional requirements in its own method. A report candidate is not a released publication. Information and enquiries are open today.
The workspace for methods and publication process.
Series production desk
Methods and publication process · Annual synthesis · Edition 4 · Example interface, not a record
Editions in production
| Annual synthesis | Global | Data check | 71 | W24 |
| Country profile 7 | Country | Peer review | 96 | W30 |
| Water outlook | Sectoral | Drafting | 31 | W29 |
| Methods note 4 | Methods | Released | 100 | done |
Data check, annual synthesis
Edition pipeline
- Outlineboard
- Draftauthors
- Data checkevery value
- Peer reviewtwo rounds
- Editorialdecision
- ReleaseDOI
- Correctionsversioned
Reports · Series production desk. Series production desk: example names and illustrative values, not a record.
Three kinds of review.
Peer review
Specialists in the subject test the reasoning, the methods and whether the conclusions follow from the evidence.
Technical review
Data, code and models behind figures are checked, and reproduced where the edition relies on them.
Editorial review
Clarity, accessibility, sourcing, disclosures and consistency with the series method.
Each series states in its method which reviews an edition must pass. Dissent and adverse findings from review are preserved, not removed.
Every source is qualified and labelled.
Sources are registered with their owner, licence, authority and known limits before they are used. Where sources disagree, the disagreement is shown rather than resolved by choosing the convenient one. Each claim carries an evidence label: Observed, Published statistics, Institution-reported, Estimated, Modelled, Forecast, Scenario, Expert judgement and Unknown. Original source authority is retained, and programme estimates stay labelled as estimates. Lineage is kept as described on Registry provenance.
How the process runs.
Process
Methods and publication process: PRISMA 2020 review reporting
PRISMA 2020 is a reporting guideline for systematic reviews; the steps follow its checklist, not a mandated sequence, and no Nexus document adopts it.
01 Plan
- 01Registration and protocolRecord · The review teamThe guideline asks for registration details, access to the protocol and any amendments.
- 02Eligibility criteriaRecord · The review teamThe guideline asks for the inclusion and exclusion criteria and how studies were grouped.
02 Find and select
- 03Search: sources and strategiesStep · The review teamThe guideline asks for the information sources and the full search strategies. It does not fix which sources are used.
- 04Selection of studiesStep · The review teamThe guideline asks how studies were judged eligible, including how many reviewers screened. It does not fix the number of reviewers.
- 05Flow diagramRecordThe flow diagram shows the number of records found, the number of studies included and the reasons for exclusion.
03 Analyse
- 06Data collectionStep · The review teamThe guideline asks how data were collected from reports and which data items were sought.
- 07Risk of biasStep · The review teamThe guideline asks for the methods and tools used to assess risk of bias.
- 08SynthesisModel · The review teamThe guideline asks for the effect measures and the synthesis methods. It does not prescribe meta-analysis.
- 09Certainty of evidenceStep · The review teamThe guideline asks for the methods used to assess certainty, and reports the result per outcome. It does not name a grading scale.
04 Report
- 10Review reportRecordThe guideline helps authors report why the review was done, what they did and what they found.
ReportsOutline of an externally published reporting guideline, not a Nexus process and not a record of operation. PRISMA 2020 mainly covers reviews of intervention effects. No Nexus page names it. Every programme is at service level R0.
What each released edition includes.
- an accessible HTML edition, and a print or download file where one is produced;
- a methods page and a source and rights register;
- reusable figures with metadata, and a permitted machine-readable data bundle;
- review and funding disclosures;
- a correction history.
Versions are permanent; corrections are visible.
- 01
Identify
Each edition has a permanent identifier and a version number.
- 02
Correct
An error is corrected in a new version, with what changed, why and who reviewed it.
- 03
Keep
Earlier versions remain available, marked as superseded.
- 04
Notify
Corrections are listed on Reports corrections and recorded in the publication record.
More about Reports.
All report series
PageGlobal series
PageNational series
PageRegional series
PageFrontier technology series
PageUniverse annual reports
PageEditorial governance
PageCorrections and supersession
PagePublication trust
PagePurpose and publisher
PageSupporting methods
PageContributors and community
PagePublic outputs
PageContact and support
PageSTEM foundation of Reports
PageHow work moves in this field
PageBuild in Foundry
PagePublish in Reports
PageThe same field across the Consortium
PageTopics
Questions and answers.
Are all reports peer reviewed?
Can I see the data behind a figure?
Are corrections ever made silently?
What happens to a report candidate that fails review?
Who can raise a correction?
Bring a method, a dataset or a question.
Information and enquiries are open today. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.
Legal documents.
Maps, data and figures on this site are shown for context and general information. They are not advice, forecasts or warnings; the limits of the information are set out in the Disclaimers and Data Notices.