Effective study selection using text mining or a single-screening approach: A study protocol

Systematic Reviews

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2018, Pages

  Waffenschmidt, Siw ^a   Hausner, Elke ^a   Sieben, Wiebke ^a   Jaschinski, Thomas ^a   Knelangen, Marco ^a   Overesch, Inga ^a  

^a INSTITUTE FOR QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY IN HEALTH CARE IQWIG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Citation screening; Screening prioritization; Semi automation; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; DATA ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HUMAN; MACHINE LEARNING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PUBLICATION; RAYYAN; SAMPLE SIZE; SCREENING; WORK EXPERIENCE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DATA MINING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES;

DATA MINING; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; RESEARCH DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85055071126     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20464053     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-018-0839-x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. O'Mara-Eves A, Thomas J, McNaught J, Miwa M, Ananiadou S. Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches. Syst Rev. 2015;4:5.
2. Olofsson H, Brolund A, Hellberg C, Silverstein R, Stenström K, Österberg M, et al. Can abstract screening workload be reduced using text mining? User experiences of the tool Rayyan. Res Syn Meth. 2017;8:275-80.
3. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10.
4. McDonagh M, Peterson K, Raina P, Chang S, Shekelle P. Avoiding bias in selecting studies: methods guide for comparative effectiveness reviews. 2013. https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/methods-guidance-bias-methods.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2018.
5. Eden J, Levit L, Berg A, Morton S, editors. Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. Washington: National Academies Press; 2011.
6. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. York: CRD; 2009.
7. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ. Chapter 7: selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgings JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: version 5.1.0; updated March 2011. http://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/chapter-7/7-selecting-studies-and-collecting-data.htm. Accessed 7 Aug 2018.
8. Paynter RA, Bañez LL, E. B, Erinoff E, Lege-Matsuura J, Potter S, et al. EPC methods: an exploration of the use of text-mining software in systematic reviews 2016. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK362044/pdf/Bookshelf-NBK362044.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2018.
9. Rathbone J, Hoffmann T, Glasziou P. Faster title and abstract screening? Evaluating Abstrackr, a semi-automated online screening program for systematic reviewers. Syst Rev. 2015;4:80.
10. Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan: a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5:210.
11. Covidence: better systematic review management. 2018. http://www.covidence.org. Accessed 7 Aug 2018.
12. EPPI-Centre. Welcome to the EPPI-Reviewer 4 gateway. http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?alias =eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/er4. Accessed 7 Aug 2018.
13. Glanville J, Wood H. Text mining opportunities: white paper. 2018. https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/methods/2018-05/MG0013-CADTH-Text-Mining-Opportunites-Final.pdf. Accessed 6 Aug 2018.
14. Hausner E, Gechter D, Knelangen M, Lampert U, Waffenschmidt S. Technische Hilfestellungen für den Screeningprozess: eine Bestandsaufnahme. In: Gemeinsam informiert entscheiden: 17. Jahrestagung des Deutschen Netzwerks Evidenzbasierte Medizin; 03-05. Germany: Cologne; 2016. http://www.egms.de/static/en/meetings/ebm2016/16ebm073.shtml. Accessed 7 Aug 2018
15. Edwards P, Clarke M, Di Guiseppi C, Pratap S, Roberts I, Wentz R. Identification of randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews: accuracy and reliability of screening records. Stat Med. 2002;21:1635-40.
16. Shemilt I, Khan N, Park S, Thomas J. Use of cost-effectiveness analysis to compare the efficiency of study identification methods in systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5:140.
17. Doust JA, Pietrzak E, Sanders S, Glasziou PP. Identifying studies for systematic reviews of diagnostic tests was difficult due to the poor sensitivity and precision of methodologic filters and the lack of information in the abstract. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:444-9.