Cargando…
Data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: A living review protocol
Background: Researchers in evidence-based medicine cannot keep up with the amounts of both old and newly published primary research articles. Support for the early stages of the systematic review process – searching and screening studies for eligibility – is necessary because it is currently impossi...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
F1000 Research Limited
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7338918/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32724560 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.22781.2 |
_version_ | 1783554784172703744 |
---|---|
author | Schmidt, Lena Olorisade, Babatunde K. McGuinness, Luke A. Thomas, James Higgins, Julian P. T. |
author_facet | Schmidt, Lena Olorisade, Babatunde K. McGuinness, Luke A. Thomas, James Higgins, Julian P. T. |
author_sort | Schmidt, Lena |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Researchers in evidence-based medicine cannot keep up with the amounts of both old and newly published primary research articles. Support for the early stages of the systematic review process – searching and screening studies for eligibility – is necessary because it is currently impossible to search for relevant research with precision. Better automated data extraction may not only facilitate the stage of review traditionally labelled ‘data extraction’, but also change earlier phases of the review process by making it possible to identify relevant research. Exponential improvements in computational processing speed and data storage are fostering the development of data mining models and algorithms. This, in combination with quicker pathways to publication, led to a large landscape of tools and methods for data mining and extraction. Objective: To review published methods and tools for data extraction to (semi)automate the systematic reviewing process. Methods: We propose to conduct a living review. With this methodology we aim to do constant evidence surveillance, bi-monthly search updates, as well as review updates every 6 months if new evidence permits it. In a cross-sectional analysis we will extract methodological characteristics and assess the quality of reporting in our included papers. Conclusions: We aim to increase transparency in the reporting and assessment of automation technologies to the benefit of data scientists, systematic reviewers and funders of health research. This living review will help to reduce duplicate efforts by data scientists who develop data mining methods. It will also serve to inform systematic reviewers about possibilities to support their data extraction. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7338918 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | F1000 Research Limited |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73389182020-07-27 Data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: A living review protocol Schmidt, Lena Olorisade, Babatunde K. McGuinness, Luke A. Thomas, James Higgins, Julian P. T. F1000Res Study Protocol Background: Researchers in evidence-based medicine cannot keep up with the amounts of both old and newly published primary research articles. Support for the early stages of the systematic review process – searching and screening studies for eligibility – is necessary because it is currently impossible to search for relevant research with precision. Better automated data extraction may not only facilitate the stage of review traditionally labelled ‘data extraction’, but also change earlier phases of the review process by making it possible to identify relevant research. Exponential improvements in computational processing speed and data storage are fostering the development of data mining models and algorithms. This, in combination with quicker pathways to publication, led to a large landscape of tools and methods for data mining and extraction. Objective: To review published methods and tools for data extraction to (semi)automate the systematic reviewing process. Methods: We propose to conduct a living review. With this methodology we aim to do constant evidence surveillance, bi-monthly search updates, as well as review updates every 6 months if new evidence permits it. In a cross-sectional analysis we will extract methodological characteristics and assess the quality of reporting in our included papers. Conclusions: We aim to increase transparency in the reporting and assessment of automation technologies to the benefit of data scientists, systematic reviewers and funders of health research. This living review will help to reduce duplicate efforts by data scientists who develop data mining methods. It will also serve to inform systematic reviewers about possibilities to support their data extraction. F1000 Research Limited 2020-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7338918/ /pubmed/32724560 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.22781.2 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Schmidt L et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Schmidt, Lena Olorisade, Babatunde K. McGuinness, Luke A. Thomas, James Higgins, Julian P. T. Data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: A living review protocol |
title | Data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: A living review protocol |
title_full | Data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: A living review protocol |
title_fullStr | Data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: A living review protocol |
title_full_unstemmed | Data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: A living review protocol |
title_short | Data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: A living review protocol |
title_sort | data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: a living review protocol |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7338918/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32724560 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.22781.2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schmidtlena dataextractionmethodsforsystematicreviewsemiautomationalivingreviewprotocol AT olorisadebabatundek dataextractionmethodsforsystematicreviewsemiautomationalivingreviewprotocol AT mcguinnesslukea dataextractionmethodsforsystematicreviewsemiautomationalivingreviewprotocol AT thomasjames dataextractionmethodsforsystematicreviewsemiautomationalivingreviewprotocol AT higginsjulianpt dataextractionmethodsforsystematicreviewsemiautomationalivingreviewprotocol |