An automated approach to identifying search terms for systematic reviews using keyword co-occurrence networks

Methods in Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 10, Issue 10, 2019, Pages 1645-1654

  Grames, Eliza M ^a   Stillman, Andrew N ^a   Tingley, Morgan W ^a   Elphick, Chris S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

Author keywords

evidence synthesis; keyword co occurrence network; keyword identification; literature review; meta analysis; systematic review; text mining

Indexed keywords

EID: 85070699193     PISSN: None     EISSN: 2041210X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/2041-210X.13268     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Baker, C. (2018). rapidraker: Rapid Automatic Keyword Extraction (RAKE) alrogithm. R package version 0.1.0.
2. Belter, C. W. (2016). Citation analysis as a literature search method for systematic reviews. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67, 2766–2777.
3. Benoit, K. (2018). quanteda: Quantitative analysis of textual data. R package version 1.3.4.
4. Bernes, C., Bråthen, K. A., Forbes, B. C., Speed, J. D., & Moen, J. (2015). What are the impacts of reindeer/caribou (Rangifer tarandus L.) on arctic and alpine vegetation? A systematic review. Environmental Evidence, 4, 4.
5. Bramer, W. M., de Jonge, G. B., Rethlefsen, M. L., Mast, F., & Kleijnen, J. (2018). A systematic approach to searching: An efficient and complete method to develop literature searches. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 106, 531.
6. Bramer, W. M., Rethlefsen, M. L., Mast, F., & Kleijnen, J. (2018). Evaluation of a new method for librarian-mediated literature searches for systematic reviews. Research Synthesis Methods, 9, 510–520.
7. Cochrane, A. L. (1972). Effectiveness and efficiency: random reflections on realth services. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust.
8. Côté, I. M., Curtis, P. S., Rothstein, H. R., & Stewart, G. B. (2013). Gathering data: Searching literature and selection criteria. In J. Koricheva, J. Gurevitch, & K. Mengersen (Eds.), Handbook of meta-analysis in ecology and evolution (pp. 37–51). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9. Delaney, A., & Tams, P. A. (2018). Searching for evidence or approval? A commentary on database search in systematic reviews and alternative information retrieval methodologies. Research Synthesis Methods, 9, 124–131.
10. Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5, 3–8.
11. Grames, E. M., Stillman, A. N., Tingley, M. W., & Elphick, C. S. (2019a). litsearchr: Automated search term selection and search strategy for systematic reviews. R package version 0.1.0. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2551701.
12. Grames, E. M., Stillman, A. N., Tingley, M. W., & Elphick, C. S. (2019b). Data from: An automated approach to identifying search terms for systematic reviews using keyword co-occurrence networks. Dryad Digital Repository, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.n1kv40m
13. Gurevitch, J., Curtis, P. S., & Jones, M. H. (2001). Meta-analysis in ecology. Advances in Ecological Research, 32, 199–247.
14. Haddaway, N. R., Bernes, C., Jonsson, B. G., & Hedlund, K. (2016). The benefits of systematic mapping to evidence-based environmental management. Ambio, 45, 613–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-016-0773-x
15. Haddaway, N. R., Hedlund, K., Jackson, L. E., Kätterer, T., Lugato, E., Thomsen, I. K., … Isberg, P.-E. (2017). How does tillage intensity affect soil organic carbon? A Systematic Review. Environmental Evidence, 6, 30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-017-0108-9
16. Haddaway, N. R., Macura, B., Whaley, P., & Pullin, A. S. (2018). ROSES RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: Pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps. Environmental Evidence, 7, 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0121-7
17. Haddaway, N. R., & Westgate, M. J. (2019). Predicting the time needed for environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps. Conservation Biology, 33, 434–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13231
18. Haddaway, N., Woodcock, P., Macura, B., & Collins, A. (2015). Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews. Conservation Biology, 29, 1596–1605. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12541
19. Hausner, E., Guddat, C., Hermanns, T., Lampert, U., & Waffenschmidt, S. (2015). Development of search strategies for systematic reviews: Validation showed the noninferiority of the objective approach. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 68, 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.09.016
20. Hausner, E., Guddat, C., Hermanns, T., Lampert, U., & Waffenschmidt, S. (2016). Prospective comparison of search strategies for systematic reviews: An objective approach yielded higher sensitivity than a conceptual one. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 77, 118–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.05.002
21. Hausner, E., Waffenschmidt, S., Kaiser, T., & Simon, M. (2012). Routine development of objectively derived search strategies. Systematic Reviews, 1, 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-19
22. Hunt, M. (1997). How science takes stock: The story of meta-analysis. New York City, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
23. Järvinen, A. (1991). A meta-analytic study of the effects of female age on laying-date and clutch-size in the great tit Parus major and the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca. Ibis, 133, 62–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.1991.tb04811.x
24. Jonnalagadda, S. R., Goyal, P., & Huffman, M. D. (2015). Automating data extraction in systematic reviews: A systematic review. Systematic Reviews, 4, 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0066-7
25. Koricheva, J., Gurevitch, J., & Mengersen, K. (2013). Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
26. Przybyla, P., Brockmeier, A. J., Kontonatsios, G., Le Pogam, M. A., McNaught, J., Elm, E., … Ananiadou, S. (2018). Prioritising references for systematic reviews with RobotAnalyst: A user study. Research Synthesis Methods, 9, 470–488.
27. Land, M., Granéli, W., Grimvall, A., Hoffmann, C. C., Mitsch, W. J., Tonderski, K. S., & Verhoeven, J. T. (2016). How effective are created or restored freshwater wetlands for nitrogen and phosphorus removal? A Systematic Review. Environmental Evidence, 5, 9.
28. Laverick, J., Piango, S., Andradi-Brown, D., Exton, D., Bongaerts, P., Bridge, T., … Rogers, A. (2018). To what extent do mesophotic coral ecosystems and shallow reefs share species of conservation interest? A Systematic Review. Environmental Evidence, 7, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0127-1
29. O’Mara-Eves, A., Thomas, J., McNaught, J., Miwa, M., & Ananiadou, S. (2015). Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: A systematic review of current approaches. Systematic Reviews, 4, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-5
30. Paisley, S., & Foster, M. J. (2018). Innovation in information retrieval methods for evidence synthesis studies. Research Synthesis Methods, 9, 506–509.
31. Porter, M. (1980). An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program, 14, 130–137. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb046814
32. Pullin, A. S., & Knight, T. M. (2001). Effectiveness in conservation practice: Pointers from medicine and public health. Conservation Biology, 15, 50–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2001.99499.x
33. Pullin, A. S., & Knight, T. M. (2009). Doing more good than harm–building an evidence-base for conservation and environmental management. Biological Conservation, 142, 931–934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.01.010
34. Pullin, A. S., & Stewart, G. B. (2006). Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 20, 1647–1656. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00485.x
35. Radhakrishnan, S., Erbis, S., Isaacs, J. A., & Kamarthi, S. (2017). Novel keyword co-occurrence network-based methods to foster systematic reviews of scientific literature. PLoS ONE, 12, e0172778.
36. Rathbone, J., Hoffmann, T., & Glasziou, P. (2015). Faster title and abstract screening? Evaluating Abstrackr, a semi-automated online screening program for systematic reviewers. Systematic Reviews, 4, 80. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0067-6
37. Richardson, W. S., Wilson, M. C., Nishikawa, J., & Hayward, R. S. (1995). The well-built clinical question: A key to evidence-based decisions. ACP Journal Club, 123, A12–A12.
38. Rose, S., Engel, D., Cramer, N., & Cowley, W. (2010). Automatic keyword extraction from individual documents. In M. W. Berry, & J. Kogan (Eds.), Text mining (pp. 1–20). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
39. Samson, D., & Schoelles, K. M. (2012). Chapter 2: Medical tests guidance (2) developing the topic and structuring systematic reviews of medical tests: Utility of PICOT S, analytic frameworks, decision trees, and other frameworks. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27, 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2007-7
40. Sarol, J., Liu, L., & Schneider, J. (2018). Testing a citation and text-based framework for retrieving publications for literature reviews. Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Bibliometric-enhanced Information Retrieval (BIR 2018), pp. 22–33.
41. Shemilt, I., Simon, A., Hollands, G. J., Marteau, T. M., Ogilvie, D., O’Mara-Eves, A., … Thomas, J. (2014). Pinpointing needles in giant haystacks: Use of text mining to reduce impractical screening workload in extremely large scoping reviews. Research Synthesis Methods, 5, 31–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1093
42. Smith, M. L., & Glass, G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psychologist, 32, 752. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.32.9.752
43. Spiriti, S., Eubank, R., Smith, P. W., & Young, D. (2013). Knot selection for least-squares and penalized splines. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 83, 1020–1036. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2011.647317
44. Spiriti, S., Smith, P., & Lecuyer, P. (2018). freeknotsplines: Algorithms for implementing free-knot splines. R package version 1.0.1.
45. Stansfield, C., O’Mara-Eves, A., & Thomas, J. (2017). Text mining for search term development in systematic reviewing: A discussion of some methods and challenges. Research Synthesis Methods, 8, 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1250
46. Su, H. N., & Lee, P. C. (2010). Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: A first look at journal papers in technology foresight. Scientometrics, 85, 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0259-8
47. Sutherland, W. J., & Wordley, C. F. (2018). A fresh approach to evidence synthesis. Nature, 558, 364–366. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05472-8
48. Tsafnat, G., Glasziou, P., Choong, M. K., Dunn, A., Galgani, F., & Coiera, E. (2014). Systematic Review Automation Technologies. Systematic Reviews, 3, 74. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-3-74
49. Tsertsvadze, A., Chen, Y. F., Moher, D., Sutcliffe, P., & McCarthy, N. (2015). How to conduct systematic reviews more expeditiously? Systematic Reviews, 4, 160. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0147-7
50. Villemey, A., Jeusset, A., Vargac, M., Bertheau, Y., Coulon, A., Touroult, J., … Sordello, R. (2018). Can linear transportation infrastructure verges constitute a habitat and/or a corridor for insects in temperate landscapes? A Systematic Review. Environmental Evidence, 7, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0117-3
51. Zhang, H., Babar, M. A., Bai, X., Li, J., & Huang, L. (2011). An empirical assessment of a systematic search process for systematic reviews. 15th Annual Conference on Evaluation Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2011).