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.
145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 39095913)
1. Automation of duplicate record detection for systematic reviews: Deduplicator. Forbes C; Greenwood H; Carter M; Clark J Syst Rev; 2024 Aug; 13(1):206. PubMed ID: 39095913 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The Automated Systematic Search Deduplicator (ASySD): a rapid, open-source, interoperable tool to remove duplicate citations in biomedical systematic reviews. Hair K; Bahor Z; Macleod M; Liao J; Sena ES BMC Biol; 2023 Sep; 21(1):189. PubMed ID: 37674179 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Better duplicate detection for systematic reviewers: evaluation of Systematic Review Assistant-Deduplication Module. Rathbone J; Carter M; Hoffmann T; Glasziou P Syst Rev; 2015 Jan; 4(1):6. PubMed ID: 25588387 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Reducing systematic review burden using Deduklick: a novel, automated, reliable, and explainable deduplication algorithm to foster medical research. Borissov N; Haas Q; Minder B; Kopp-Heim D; von Gernler M; Janka H; Teodoro D; Amini P Syst Rev; 2022 Aug; 11(1):172. PubMed ID: 35978441 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Deduplicating records in systematic reviews: there are free, accurate automated ways to do so. Guimarães NS; Ferreira AJF; Ribeiro Silva RC; de Paula AA; Lisboa CS; Magno L; Ichiara MY; Barreto ML J Clin Epidemiol; 2022 Dec; 152():110-115. PubMed ID: 36241035 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Considerations for conducting systematic reviews: A follow-up study to evaluate the performance of various automated methods for reference de-duplication. McKeown S; Mir ZM Res Synth Methods; 2024 Nov; 15(6):896-904. PubMed ID: 39051574 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Rule-based deduplication of article records from bibliographic databases. Jiang Y; Lin C; Meng W; Yu C; Cohen AM; Smalheiser NR Database (Oxford); 2014; 2014():bat086. PubMed ID: 24434031 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Machine learning reduced workload with minimal risk of missing studies: development and evaluation of a randomized controlled trial classifier for Cochrane Reviews. Thomas J; McDonald S; Noel-Storr A; Shemilt I; Elliott J; Mavergames C; Marshall IJ J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 May; 133():140-151. PubMed ID: 33171275 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Considerations for conducting systematic reviews: evaluating the performance of different methods for de-duplicating references. McKeown S; Mir ZM Syst Rev; 2021 Jan; 10(1):38. PubMed ID: 33485394 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The Impact of Systematic Review Automation Tools on Methodological Quality and Time Taken to Complete Systematic Review Tasks: Case Study. Clark J; McFarlane C; Cleo G; Ishikawa Ramos C; Marshall S JMIR Med Educ; 2021 May; 7(2):e24418. PubMed ID: 34057072 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Secure and scalable deduplication of horizontally partitioned health data for privacy-preserving distributed statistical computation. Yigzaw KY; Michalas A; Bellika JG BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2017 Jan; 17(1):1. PubMed ID: 28049465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A shared latent space matrix factorisation method for recommending new trial evidence for systematic review updates. Surian D; Dunn AG; Orenstein L; Bashir R; Coiera E; Bourgeois FT J Biomed Inform; 2018 Mar; 79():32-40. PubMed ID: 29410356 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Search methods for prognostic factor systematic reviews: a methodologic investigation. Boulos L; Ogilvie R; Hayden JA J Med Libr Assoc; 2021 Jan; 109(1):23-32. PubMed ID: 33424461 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Search strategies to identify diagnostic accuracy studies in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Beynon R; Leeflang MM; McDonald S; Eisinga A; Mitchell RL; Whiting P; Glanville JM Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2013 Sep; 2013(9):MR000022. PubMed ID: 24022476 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reference checking for systematic reviews using Endnote. Bramer WM J Med Libr Assoc; 2018 Oct; 106(4):542-546. PubMed ID: 30271303 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A comparison of the performance of seven key bibliographic databases in identifying all relevant systematic reviews of interventions for hypertension. Rathbone J; Carter M; Hoffmann T; Glasziou P Syst Rev; 2016 Feb; 5():27. PubMed ID: 26862061 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Expediting citation screening using PICo-based title-only screening for identifying studies in scoping searches and rapid reviews. Rathbone J; Albarqouni L; Bakhit M; Beller E; Byambasuren O; Hoffmann T; Scott AM; Glasziou P Syst Rev; 2017 Nov; 6(1):233. PubMed ID: 29178925 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]