Literature DB >> 28374510

Can abstract screening workload be reduced using text mining? User experiences of the tool Rayyan.

Hanna Olofsson1, Agneta Brolund1, Christel Hellberg1, Rebecca Silverstein1, Karin Stenström1, Marie Österberg1, Jessica Dagerhamn1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: One time-consuming aspect of conducting systematic reviews is the task of sifting through abstracts to identify relevant studies. One promising approach for reducing this burden uses text mining technology to identify those abstracts that are potentially most relevant for a project, allowing those abstracts to be screened first.
OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of the text mining functionality of the abstract screening tool Rayyan. User experiences were collected.
METHODS: Rayyan was used to screen abstracts for 6 reviews in 2015. After screening 25%, 50%, and 75% of the abstracts, the screeners logged the relevant references identified. A survey was sent to users.
RESULTS: After screening half of the search result with Rayyan, 86% to 99% of the references deemed relevant to the study were identified. Of those studies included in the final reports, 96% to 100% were already identified in the first half of the screening process. Users rated Rayyan 4.5 out of 5. DISCUSSION: The text mining function in Rayyan successfully helped reviewers identify relevant studies early in the screening process.
Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords:  abstract screening; review efficiency; systematic reviews; text mining

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28374510     DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1237

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Synth Methods        ISSN: 1759-2879            Impact factor:   5.273


  12 in total

1.  The value of a second reviewer for study selection in systematic reviews.

Authors:  Carolyn R T Stoll; Sonya Izadi; Susan Fowler; Paige Green; Jerry Suls; Graham A Colditz
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2019-07-18       Impact factor: 5.273

2.  Protocol for developing a Database of Zoonotic disease Research in India (DoZooRI).

Authors:  Pranab Chatterjee; Soumyadeep Bhaumik; Abhimanyu Singh Chauhan; Manish Kakkar
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-12-10       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Single screening versus conventional double screening for study selection in systematic reviews: a methodological systematic review.

Authors:  Siw Waffenschmidt; Marco Knelangen; Wiebke Sieben; Stefanie Bühn; Dawid Pieper
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-06-28       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 4.  Creation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Guideline for neonatal intestinal surgery patients: a knowledge synthesis and consensus generation approach and protocol study.

Authors:  Ashleigh C N Gibb; Megan A Crosby; Caraline McDiarmid; Denisa Urban; Jennifer Y K Lam; Paul W Wales; Megan Brockel; Mehul Raval; Martin Offringa; Erik D Skarsgard; Tomas Wester; Kenneth Wong; David de Beer; Gregg Nelson; Mary E Brindle
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-12-09       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Considerations for conducting systematic reviews: evaluating the performance of different methods for de-duplicating references.

Authors:  Sandra McKeown; Zuhaib M Mir
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2021-01-23

6.  Research Screener: a machine learning tool to semi-automate abstract screening for systematic reviews.

Authors:  Kevin E K Chai; Robin L J Lines; Daniel F Gucciardi; Leo Ng
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2021-04-01

7.  Evaluating the relationship between citation set size, team size and screening methods used in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Katie O'Hearn; Cameron MacDonald; Anne Tsampalieros; Leo Kadota; Ryan Sandarage; Supun Kotteduwa Jayawarden; Michele Datko; John M Reynolds; Thanh Bui; Shagufta Sultan; Margaret Sampson; Misty Pratt; Nick Barrowman; Nassr Nama; Matthew Page; James Dayre McNally
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  Making progress with the automation of systematic reviews: principles of the International Collaboration for the Automation of Systematic Reviews (ICASR).

Authors:  Elaine Beller; Justin Clark; Guy Tsafnat; Clive Adams; Heinz Diehl; Hans Lund; Mourad Ouzzani; Kristina Thayer; James Thomas; Tari Turner; Jun Xia; Karen Robinson; Paul Glasziou
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2018-05-19

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

Authors:  Siw Waffenschmidt; Elke Hausner; Wiebke Sieben; Thomas Jaschinski; Marco Knelangen; Inga Overesch
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2018-10-20

10.  Decoding semi-automated title-abstract screening: findings from a convenience sample of reviews.

Authors:  Allison Gates; Michelle Gates; Daniel DaRosa; Sarah A Elliott; Jennifer Pillay; Sholeh Rahman; Ben Vandermeer; Lisa Hartling
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2020-11-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.