These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

186 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36597132)

  • 1. Unsupervised title and abstract screening for systematic review: a retrospective case-study using topic modelling methodology.
    Natukunda A; Muchene LK
    Syst Rev; 2023 Jan; 12(1):1. PubMed ID: 36597132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
    Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Title, abstract, and keyword searching resulted in poor recovery of articles in systematic reviews of epidemiologic practice.
    Penning de Vries BBL; van Smeden M; Rosendaal FR; Groenwold RHH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 May; 121():55-61. PubMed ID: 31982541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Faster title and abstract screening? Evaluating Abstrackr, a semi-automated online screening program for systematic reviewers.
    Rathbone J; Hoffmann T; Glasziou P
    Syst Rev; 2015 Jun; 4():80. PubMed ID: 26073974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Screening for in vitro systematic reviews: a comparison of screening methods and training of a machine learning classifier.
    Wilson E; Cruz F; Maclean D; Ghanawi J; McCann SK; Brennan PM; Liao J; Sena ES; Macleod M
    Clin Sci (Lond); 2023 Jan; 137(2):181-193. PubMed ID: 36630537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Reducing systematic review workload through certainty-based screening.
    Miwa M; Thomas J; O'Mara-Eves A; Ananiadou S
    J Biomed Inform; 2014 Oct; 51():242-53. PubMed ID: 24954015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.
    Osborne SR; Alston LV; Bolton KA; Whelan J; Reeve E; Wong Shee A; Browne J; Walker T; Versace VL; Allender S; Nichols M; Backholer K; Goodwin N; Lewis S; Dalton H; Prael G; Curtin M; Brooks R; Verdon S; Crockett J; Hodgins G; Walsh S; Lyle DM; Thompson SC; Browne LJ; Knight S; Pit SW; Jones M; Gillam MH; Leach MJ; Gonzalez-Chica DA; Muyambi K; Eshetie T; Tran K; May E; Lieschke G; Parker V; Smith A; Hayes C; Dunlop AJ; Rajappa H; White R; Oakley P; Holliday S
    Med J Aust; 2020 Dec; 213 Suppl 11():S3-S32.e1. PubMed ID: 33314144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Sensitivity and Specificity of Using GPT-3.5 Turbo Models for Title and Abstract Screening in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.
    Tran VT; Gartlehner G; Yaacoub S; Boutron I; Schwingshackl L; Stadelmaier J; Sommer I; Alebouyeh F; Afach S; Meerpohl J; Ravaud P
    Ann Intern Med; 2024 Jun; 177(6):791-799. PubMed ID: 38768452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. SWIFT-Review: a text-mining workbench for systematic review.
    Howard BE; Phillips J; Miller K; Tandon A; Mav D; Shah MR; Holmgren S; Pelch KE; Walker V; Rooney AA; Macleod M; Shah RR; Thayer K
    Syst Rev; 2016 May; 5():87. PubMed ID: 27216467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Text mining to support abstract screening for knowledge syntheses: a semi-automated workflow.
    Pham B; Jovanovic J; Bagheri E; Antony J; Ashoor H; Nguyen TT; Rios P; Robson R; Thomas SM; Watt J; Straus SE; Tricco AC
    Syst Rev; 2021 May; 10(1):156. PubMed ID: 34039433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Aligning text mining and machine learning algorithms with best practices for study selection in systematic literature reviews.
    Popoff E; Besada M; Jansen JP; Cope S; Kanters S
    Syst Rev; 2020 Dec; 9(1):293. PubMed ID: 33308292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Discriminating between empirical studies and nonempirical works using automated text classification.
    Langlois A; Nie JY; Thomas J; Hong QN; Pluye P
    Res Synth Methods; 2018 Dec; 9(4):587-601. PubMed ID: 30103261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Natural language processing was effective in assisting rapid title and abstract screening when updating systematic reviews.
    Qin X; Liu J; Wang Y; Liu Y; Deng K; Ma Y; Zou K; Li L; Sun X
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 May; 133():121-129. PubMed ID: 33485929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An Automated Literature Review Tool (LiteRev) for Streamlining and Accelerating Research Using Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning: Descriptive Performance Evaluation Study.
    Orel E; Ciglenecki I; Thiabaud A; Temerev A; Calmy A; Keiser O; Merzouki A
    J Med Internet Res; 2023 Sep; 25():e39736. PubMed ID: 37713261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.
    Allen D; Gillen E; Rixson L
    JBI Libr Syst Rev; 2009; 7(3):80-129. PubMed ID: 27820426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Development of a pharmaceutical science systematic review process using a semi-automated machine learning tool: Intravenous drug compatibility in the neonatal intensive care setting.
    De Silva DTN; Moore BR; Strunk T; Petrovski M; Varis V; Chai K; Ng L; Batty KT
    Pharmacol Res Perspect; 2024 Feb; 12(1):e1170. PubMed ID: 38204432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Automation of systematic reviews of biomedical literature: a scoping review of studies indexed in PubMed.
    Tóth B; Berek L; Gulácsi L; Péntek M; Zrubka Z
    Syst Rev; 2024 Jul; 13(1):174. PubMed ID: 38978132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. In-depth evaluation of machine learning methods for semi-automating article screening in a systematic review of mechanistic literature.
    Kebede MM; Le Cornet C; Fortner RT
    Res Synth Methods; 2023 Mar; 14(2):156-172. PubMed ID: 35798691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Performance and usability of machine learning for screening in systematic reviews: a comparative evaluation of three tools.
    Gates A; Guitard S; Pillay J; Elliott SA; Dyson MP; Newton AS; Hartling L
    Syst Rev; 2019 Nov; 8(1):278. PubMed ID: 31727150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The strong focus on positive results in abstracts may cause bias in systematic reviews: a case study on abstract reporting bias.
    Duyx B; Swaen GMH; Urlings MJE; Bouter LM; Zeegers MP
    Syst Rev; 2019 Jul; 8(1):174. PubMed ID: 31315665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.