(Semi)automated approaches to data extraction for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in social sciences: A living review

Author:

Legate AmandaORCID,Nimon Kim,Noblin Ashlee

Abstract

Background An abundance of rapidly accumulating scientific evidence presents novel opportunities for researchers and practitioners alike, yet such advantages are often overshadowed by resource demands associated with finding and aggregating a continually expanding body of scientific information. Data extraction activities associated with evidence synthesis have been described as time-consuming to the point of critically limiting the usefulness of research. Across social science disciplines, the use of automation technologies for timely and accurate knowledge synthesis can enhance research translation value, better inform key policy development, and expand the current understanding of human interactions, organizations, and systems. Ongoing developments surrounding automation are highly concentrated in research for evidence-based medicine with limited evidence surrounding tools and techniques applied outside of the clinical research community. The goal of the present study is to extend the automation knowledge base by synthesizing current trends in the application of extraction technologies of key data elements of interest for social scientists. Methods We report the baseline results of a living systematic review of automated data extraction techniques supporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the social sciences. This review follows PRISMA standards for reporting systematic reviews. Results The baseline review of social science research yielded 23 relevant studies. Conclusions When considering the process of automating systematic review and meta-analysis information extraction, social science research falls short as compared to clinical research that focuses on automatic processing of information related to the PICO framework. With a few exceptions, most tools were either in the infancy stage and not accessible to applied researchers, were domain specific, or required substantial manual coding of articles before automation could occur. Additionally, few solutions considered extraction of data from tables which is where key data elements reside that social and behavioral scientists analyze.

Publisher

F1000 Research Ltd

Reference79 articles.

1. The Canonical Model of Structure for Data Extraction in Systematic Reviews of Scientific Research Articles

2. Contextual information retrieval in research articles: Semantic publishing tools for the research community.;M Angrosh;Semantic Web.,2014

3. Research method classification with deep transfer learning for semi-automatic meta-analysis of information systems papers.;A Anisienia;Proceedings of the 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.,2021

4. The application of text mining methods in innovation research: Current state, evolution patterns, and development priorities.;D Antons;R&D Manag.,2020

5. An Ontology-Based Approach to Semi-Automate Systematic Literature Reviews

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3