ReviewJournal of global health2017
"Crowdsourcing" ten years in: A review.
Review in Journal of global health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two decades of the CHNRI method (2006-2025): Tracking its evolution and contribution to the emerging field of ideometrics.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Increasing Birth-Dose Hepatitis B Vaccination in Nigeria: Qualitative Analysis of Data From a Crowdsourcing Open Call.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- A Perspective on Crowdsourcing and Human-in-the-Loop Workflows in Precision Health.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Does the registry speak your language? A case study of the Global Angelman Syndrome Registry.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2023Article
- Feasibility assessment of crowdsourcing slogans for promoting household waste segregation in India: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Implementation and evaluation of crowdsourcing in global health education.Global health research and policy · 2022Article
- Leveraging non-expert crowdsourcing to segment the optic cup and disc of multicolor fundus images.Biomedical optics express · 2022Article
- Article
- Twitter-based crowdsourcing: What kind of measures can help to end the COVID-19 pandemic faster?Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Assessing socio-economic profile of U-Reporters: Towards establishing a pool for equity analysis of future crowdsourced surveys.Journal of global health · 2021Article
- Crowdsourcing and open innovation in drug discovery: recent contributions and future directions.Drug discovery today · 2020Review
- Article
- Emerging Wireless Sensor Networks and Internet of Things Technologies-Foundations of Smart Healthcare.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Article
- Toward Personalized Tinnitus Treatment: An Exploratory Study Based on Internet Crowdsensing.Frontiers in public health · 2019Article
- Identifying potential uses of crowdsourcing in global health, conflict, and humanitarian settings: an adapted CHNRI (Child Health and Nutrition Initiative) exercise.Journal of global health · 2018Article
- Applications of crowdsourcing in health: an overview.Journal of global health · 2018Review
- Setting research priorities for maternal, newborn, child health and nutrition in India by engaging experts from 256 indigenous institutions contributing over 4000 research ideas: a CHNRI exercise by ICMR and INCLEN.Journal of global health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFirst coined by Howe in 2006, the field of crowdsourcing has grown exponentially. Despite its growth and its transcendence across many fields, the definition of crowdsourcing has still not been agreed upon, and examples are poorly indexed in peer-reviewed literature. Many examples of crowdsourcing have not been scaled-up past the pilot phase. In spite of this, crowdsourcing has great potential, especially in global health where resources are lacking. This narrative review seeks to review both indexed and grey crowdsourcing literature broadly in order to explore the current state of the field.
methodsThis is a review of reviews of crowdsourcing. Semantic searches were conducted using Google Scholar rather than indexed databases due to poor indexing of the topic. 996 articles were retrieved, of which 69 were initially identified as being reviews or theoretically-based. 21 of these were found to be irrelevant and 48 articles were reviewed.
resultsThis narrative review focuses on defining crowdsourcing, taxonomies of crowdsourcing, who constitutes the crowd, research that is amenable to crowdsourcing, regulatory and ethical aspects of crowdsourcing and some notable examples of crowdsourcing.
conclusionsCrowdsourcing has the potential to be hugely promising, especially in global health, due to its ability to collect information rapidly, inexpensively and accurately. Rigorous ethical and regulatory controls are needed to ensure data are collected and analysed appropriately and crowdsourcing should be considered complementary to traditional research methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.