101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37340494)
1. Performance of active learning models for screening prioritization in systematic reviews: a simulation study into the Average Time to Discover relevant records.
Ferdinands G; Schram R; de Bruin J; Bagheri A; Oberski DL; Tummers L; Teijema JJ; van de Schoot R
Syst Rev; 2023 Jun; 12(1):100. PubMed ID: 37340494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Machine learning for screening prioritization in systematic reviews: comparative performance of Abstrackr and EPPI-Reviewer.
Tsou AY; Treadwell JR; Erinoff E; Schoelles K
Syst Rev; 2020 Apr; 9(1):73. PubMed ID: 32241297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The SAFE procedure: a practical stopping heuristic for active learning-based screening in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Boetje J; van de Schoot R
Syst Rev; 2024 Mar; 13(1):81. PubMed ID: 38429798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Systematic review using a spiral approach with machine learning.
Saeidmehr A; Steel PDG; Samavati FF
Syst Rev; 2024 Jan; 13(1):32. PubMed ID: 38233959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Machine learning computational tools to assist the performance of systematic reviews: A mapping review.
Cierco Jimenez R; Lee T; Rosillo N; Cordova R; Cree IA; Gonzalez A; Indave Ruiz BI
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Dec; 22(1):322. PubMed ID: 36522637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Screening nonrandomized studies for medical systematic reviews: a comparative study of classifiers.
Bekhuis T; Demner-Fushman D
Artif Intell Med; 2012 Jul; 55(3):197-207. PubMed ID: 22677493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. SWIFT-Active Screener: Accelerated document screening through active learning and integrated recall estimation.
Howard BE; Phillips J; Tandon A; Maharana A; Elmore R; Mav D; Sedykh A; Thayer K; Merrick BA; Walker V; Rooney A; Shah RR
Environ Int; 2020 May; 138():105623. PubMed ID: 32203803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Machine learning algorithms for systematic review: reducing workload in a preclinical review of animal studies and reducing human screening error.
Bannach-Brown A; Przybyła P; Thomas J; Rice ASC; Ananiadou S; Liao J; Macleod MR
Syst Rev; 2019 Jan; 8(1):23. PubMed ID: 30646959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Addressing the challenges of reconstructing systematic reviews datasets: a case study and a noisy label filter procedure.
Neeleman R; Leenaars CHC; Oud M; Weijdema F; van de Schoot R
Syst Rev; 2024 Feb; 13(1):69. PubMed ID: 38368379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The semi-automation of title and abstract screening: a retrospective exploration of ways to leverage Abstrackr's relevance predictions in systematic and rapid reviews.
Gates A; Gates M; Sebastianski M; Guitard S; Elliott SA; Hartling L
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Jun; 20(1):139. PubMed ID: 32493228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Automated screening of research studies for systematic reviews using study characteristics.
Tsafnat G; Glasziou P; Karystianis G; Coiera E
Syst Rev; 2018 Apr; 7(1):64. PubMed ID: 29695296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Machine Learning assisted systematic reviewing in orthopaedics.
Pijls BG
J Orthop; 2024 Feb; 48():103-106. PubMed ID: 38089691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Enhancing recall in automated record screening: A resampling algorithm.
Hou Z; Tipton E
Res Synth Methods; 2024 May; 15(3):372-383. PubMed ID: 38185812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Research Screener: a machine learning tool to semi-automate abstract screening for systematic reviews.
Chai KEK; Lines RLJ; Gucciardi DF; Ng L
Syst Rev; 2021 Apr; 10(1):93. PubMed ID: 33795003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Assessing the accuracy of machine-assisted abstract screening with DistillerAI: a user study.
Gartlehner G; Wagner G; Lux L; Affengruber L; Dobrescu A; Kaminski-Hartenthaler A; Viswanathan M
Syst Rev; 2019 Nov; 8(1):277. PubMed ID: 31727159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Methodological insights into ChatGPT's screening performance in systematic reviews.
Issaiy M; Ghanaati H; Kolahi S; Shakiba M; Jalali AH; Zarei D; Kazemian S; Avanaki MA; Firouznia K
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2024 Mar; 24(1):78. PubMed ID: 38539117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Increasing the efficiency of study selection for systematic reviews using prioritization tools and a single-screening approach.
Waffenschmidt S; Sieben W; Jakubeit T; Knelangen M; Overesch I; Bühn S; Pieper D; Skoetz N; Hausner E
Syst Rev; 2023 Sep; 12(1):161. PubMed ID: 37705060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A comparison of machine learning methods to find clinical trials for inclusion in new systematic reviews from their PROSPERO registrations prior to searching and screening.
Liu S; Bourgeois FT; Narang C; Dunn AG
Res Synth Methods; 2024 Jan; 15(1):73-85. PubMed ID: 37749068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Increasing comprehensiveness and reducing workload in a systematic review of complex interventions using automated machine learning.
Uthman OA; Court R; Enderby J; Al-Khudairy L; Nduka C; Mistry H; Melendez-Torres GJ; Taylor-Phillips S; Clarke A
Health Technol Assess; 2022 Nov; ():. PubMed ID: 36562494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
