Cargando…
Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the automated abstract screening tool Rayyan. METHODS: The records obtained from the search for three systematic reviews were manually screened in four stages. At the end of each stage, Rayyan was used to predict the eligibility score for the remaining recor...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9161508/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35655155 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01631-8 |
_version_ | 1784719500007964672 |
---|---|
author | Valizadeh, Amir Moassefi, Mana Nakhostin-Ansari, Amin Hosseini Asl, Seyed Hossein Saghab Torbati, Mehrnush Aghajani, Reyhaneh Maleki Ghorbani, Zahra Faghani, Shahriar |
author_facet | Valizadeh, Amir Moassefi, Mana Nakhostin-Ansari, Amin Hosseini Asl, Seyed Hossein Saghab Torbati, Mehrnush Aghajani, Reyhaneh Maleki Ghorbani, Zahra Faghani, Shahriar |
author_sort | Valizadeh, Amir |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the automated abstract screening tool Rayyan. METHODS: The records obtained from the search for three systematic reviews were manually screened in four stages. At the end of each stage, Rayyan was used to predict the eligibility score for the remaining records. At two different thresholds (≤2.5 and < 2.5 for exclusion of a record) Rayyan-generated ratings were compared with the decisions made by human reviewers in the manual screening process and the tool’s accuracy metrics were calculated. RESULTS: Two thousand fifty-four records were screened manually, of which 379 were judged to be eligible for full-text assessment, and 112 were eventually included in the final review. For finding records eligible for full-text assessment, at the threshold of < 2.5 for exclusion, Rayyan managed to achieve sensitivity values of 97-99% with specificity values of 19-58%, while at the threshold of ≤2.5 for exclusion it had a specificity of 100% with sensitivity values of 1-29%. For the task of finding eligible reports for inclusion in the final review, almost similar results were obtained. DISCUSSION: At the threshold of < 2.5 for exclusion, Rayyan managed to be a reliable tool for excluding ineligible records, but it was not much reliable for finding eligible records. We emphasize that this study was conducted on diagnostic test accuracy reviews, which are more difficult to screen due to inconsistent terminology. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01631-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9161508 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91615082022-06-03 Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews Valizadeh, Amir Moassefi, Mana Nakhostin-Ansari, Amin Hosseini Asl, Seyed Hossein Saghab Torbati, Mehrnush Aghajani, Reyhaneh Maleki Ghorbani, Zahra Faghani, Shahriar BMC Med Res Methodol Research OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the automated abstract screening tool Rayyan. METHODS: The records obtained from the search for three systematic reviews were manually screened in four stages. At the end of each stage, Rayyan was used to predict the eligibility score for the remaining records. At two different thresholds (≤2.5 and < 2.5 for exclusion of a record) Rayyan-generated ratings were compared with the decisions made by human reviewers in the manual screening process and the tool’s accuracy metrics were calculated. RESULTS: Two thousand fifty-four records were screened manually, of which 379 were judged to be eligible for full-text assessment, and 112 were eventually included in the final review. For finding records eligible for full-text assessment, at the threshold of < 2.5 for exclusion, Rayyan managed to achieve sensitivity values of 97-99% with specificity values of 19-58%, while at the threshold of ≤2.5 for exclusion it had a specificity of 100% with sensitivity values of 1-29%. For the task of finding eligible reports for inclusion in the final review, almost similar results were obtained. DISCUSSION: At the threshold of < 2.5 for exclusion, Rayyan managed to be a reliable tool for excluding ineligible records, but it was not much reliable for finding eligible records. We emphasize that this study was conducted on diagnostic test accuracy reviews, which are more difficult to screen due to inconsistent terminology. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01631-8. BioMed Central 2022-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9161508/ /pubmed/35655155 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01631-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Valizadeh, Amir Moassefi, Mana Nakhostin-Ansari, Amin Hosseini Asl, Seyed Hossein Saghab Torbati, Mehrnush Aghajani, Reyhaneh Maleki Ghorbani, Zahra Faghani, Shahriar Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews |
title | Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews |
title_full | Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews |
title_fullStr | Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews |
title_full_unstemmed | Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews |
title_short | Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews |
title_sort | abstract screening using the automated tool rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9161508/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35655155 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01631-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT valizadehamir abstractscreeningusingtheautomatedtoolrayyanresultsofeffectivenessinthreediagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews AT moassefimana abstractscreeningusingtheautomatedtoolrayyanresultsofeffectivenessinthreediagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews AT nakhostinansariamin abstractscreeningusingtheautomatedtoolrayyanresultsofeffectivenessinthreediagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews AT hosseiniaslseyedhossein abstractscreeningusingtheautomatedtoolrayyanresultsofeffectivenessinthreediagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews AT saghabtorbatimehrnush abstractscreeningusingtheautomatedtoolrayyanresultsofeffectivenessinthreediagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews AT aghajanireyhaneh abstractscreeningusingtheautomatedtoolrayyanresultsofeffectivenessinthreediagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews AT malekighorbanizahra abstractscreeningusingtheautomatedtoolrayyanresultsofeffectivenessinthreediagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews AT faghanishahriar abstractscreeningusingtheautomatedtoolrayyanresultsofeffectivenessinthreediagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews |