...
首页> 外文期刊>Systematic Reviews >SWIFT-Review: a text-mining workbench for systematic review
【24h】

SWIFT-Review: a text-mining workbench for systematic review

机译:SWIFT审查:用于系统审查的文本挖掘工作台

获取原文

摘要

Background There is growing interest in using machine learning approaches to priority rank studies and reduce human burden in screening literature when conducting systematic reviews. In addition, identifying addressable questions during the problem formulation phase of systematic review can be challenging, especially for topics having a large literature base. Here, we assess the performance of the SWIFT-Review priority ranking algorithm for identifying studies relevant to a given research question. We also explore the use of SWIFT-Review during problem formulation to identify, categorize, and visualize research areas that are data rich/data poor within a large literature corpus. Methods Twenty case studies, including 15 public data sets, representing a range of complexity and size, were used to assess the priority ranking performance of SWIFT-Review. For each study, seed sets of manually annotated included and excluded titles and s were used for machine training. The remaining references were then ranked for relevance using an algorithm that considers term frequency and latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) topic modeling. This ranking was evaluated with respect to (1) the number of studies screened in order to identify 95?% of known relevant studies and (2) the “Work Saved over Sampling” (WSS) performance metric. To assess SWIFT-Review for use in problem formulation, PubMed literature search results for 171 chemicals implicated as EDCs were uploaded into SWIFT-Review (264,588 studies) and categorized based on evidence stream and health outcome. Patterns of search results were surveyed and visualized using a variety of interactive graphics. Results Compared with the reported performance of other tools using the same datasets, the SWIFT-Review ranking procedure obtained the highest scores on 11 out of 15 of the public datasets. Overall, these results suggest that using machine learning to triage documents for screening has the potential to save, on average, more than 50?% of the screening effort ordinarily required when using un-ordered document lists. In addition, the tagging and annotation capabilities of SWIFT-Review can be useful during the activities of scoping and problem formulation. Conclusions Text-mining and machine learning software such as SWIFT-Review can be valuable tools to reduce the human screening burden and assist in problem formulation.
机译:背景技术使用机器学习方法进行优先级研究并减少进行系统综述时筛选文献的人力负担的兴趣日益浓厚。此外,在系统评价的问题提出阶段确定可解决的问题可能具有挑战性,尤其是对于具有大量文献基础的主题而言。在这里,我们评估SWIFT审阅优先级排序算法的性能,以识别与给定研究问题相关的研究。我们还探索在问题表述过程中使用SWIFT审阅来识别,分类和可视化大型文献语料库中数据丰富/数据贫乏的研究领域。方法采用20个案例研究(包括15个公共数据集)来代表SWIFT-Review的优先级排序性能,这些数据代表了一系列复杂性和规模。对于每个研究,都使用人工注释的包含和排除标题和种子集进行机器训练。然后,使用考虑词频和潜在狄利克雷分配(LDA)主题建模的算法对其余参考文献进行相关性排名。该排名是根据(1)筛选出的研究数量以识别95%的已知相关研究和(2)“抽样工作节省”(WSS)绩效指标进行评估的。为了评估用于问题制定的SWIFT审查,将涉及EDC的171种化学药品的PubMed文献搜索结果上载到SWIFT审查(264,588项研究)中,并根据证据流和健康结果进行了分类。使用各种交互式图形对搜索结果的模式进行了调查和可视化。结果与报告的使用相同数据集的其他工具的性能相比,SWIFT审查排名程序在15个公共数据集中的11个中获得了最高分。总体而言,这些结果表明,使用机器学习对文档进行分类可以平均节省无序文档列表通常所需的筛选工作量的50%以上。另外,SWIFT-Review的标记和注释功能在范围界定和问题制定活动中可能很有用。结论文本挖掘和机器学习软件(例如SWIFT-Review)可以成为减轻人员筛选负担并帮助解决问题的宝贵工具。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号