Cargando…

“Crowdsourcing” ten years in: A review

BACKGROUND: First coined by Howe in 2006, the field of crowdsourcing has grown exponentially. Despite its growth and its transcendence across many fields, the definition of crowdsourcing has still not been agreed upon, and examples are poorly indexed in peer–reviewed literature. Many examples of cro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Wazny, Kerri
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Edinburgh University Global Health Society 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5735781/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29302322
http://dx.doi.org/10.7189/jogh.07.020601
_version_ 1783287266964144128
author Wazny, Kerri
author_facet Wazny, Kerri
author_sort Wazny, Kerri
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: First coined by Howe in 2006, the field of crowdsourcing has grown exponentially. Despite its growth and its transcendence across many fields, the definition of crowdsourcing has still not been agreed upon, and examples are poorly indexed in peer–reviewed literature. Many examples of crowdsourcing have not been scaled–up past the pilot phase. In spite of this, crowdsourcing has great potential, especially in global health where resources are lacking. This narrative review seeks to review both indexed and grey crowdsourcing literature broadly in order to explore the current state of the field. METHODS: This is a review of reviews of crowdsourcing. Semantic searches were conducted using Google Scholar rather than indexed databases due to poor indexing of the topic. 996 articles were retrieved, of which 69 were initially identified as being reviews or theoretically–based. 21 of these were found to be irrelevant and 48 articles were reviewed. RESULTS: This narrative review focuses on defining crowdsourcing, taxonomies of crowdsourcing, who constitutes the crowd, research that is amenable to crowdsourcing, regulatory and ethical aspects of crowdsourcing and some notable examples of crowdsourcing. CONCLUSIONS: Crowdsourcing has the potential to be hugely promising, especially in global health, due to its ability to collect information rapidly, inexpensively and accurately. Rigorous ethical and regulatory controls are needed to ensure data are collected and analysed appropriately and crowdsourcing should be considered complementary to traditional research methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5735781
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Edinburgh University Global Health Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57357812018-01-04 “Crowdsourcing” ten years in: A review Wazny, Kerri J Glob Health Research Theme 2: Global Health Research Priorities BACKGROUND: First coined by Howe in 2006, the field of crowdsourcing has grown exponentially. Despite its growth and its transcendence across many fields, the definition of crowdsourcing has still not been agreed upon, and examples are poorly indexed in peer–reviewed literature. Many examples of crowdsourcing have not been scaled–up past the pilot phase. In spite of this, crowdsourcing has great potential, especially in global health where resources are lacking. This narrative review seeks to review both indexed and grey crowdsourcing literature broadly in order to explore the current state of the field. METHODS: This is a review of reviews of crowdsourcing. Semantic searches were conducted using Google Scholar rather than indexed databases due to poor indexing of the topic. 996 articles were retrieved, of which 69 were initially identified as being reviews or theoretically–based. 21 of these were found to be irrelevant and 48 articles were reviewed. RESULTS: This narrative review focuses on defining crowdsourcing, taxonomies of crowdsourcing, who constitutes the crowd, research that is amenable to crowdsourcing, regulatory and ethical aspects of crowdsourcing and some notable examples of crowdsourcing. CONCLUSIONS: Crowdsourcing has the potential to be hugely promising, especially in global health, due to its ability to collect information rapidly, inexpensively and accurately. Rigorous ethical and regulatory controls are needed to ensure data are collected and analysed appropriately and crowdsourcing should be considered complementary to traditional research methods. Edinburgh University Global Health Society 2017-12 2017-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5735781/ /pubmed/29302322 http://dx.doi.org/10.7189/jogh.07.020601 Text en Copyright © 2017 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Research Theme 2: Global Health Research Priorities
Wazny, Kerri
“Crowdsourcing” ten years in: A review
title “Crowdsourcing” ten years in: A review
title_full “Crowdsourcing” ten years in: A review
title_fullStr “Crowdsourcing” ten years in: A review
title_full_unstemmed “Crowdsourcing” ten years in: A review
title_short “Crowdsourcing” ten years in: A review
title_sort “crowdsourcing” ten years in: a review
topic Research Theme 2: Global Health Research Priorities
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5735781/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29302322
http://dx.doi.org/10.7189/jogh.07.020601
work_keys_str_mv AT waznykerri crowdsourcingtenyearsinareview