Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29531847›Full record

ReviewJournal of pathology informatics2018

A Review on the Applications of Crowdsourcing in Human Pathology.

Roshanak Alialy, Sasan Tavakkol, Elham Tavakkol, Amir Ghorbani-Aghbologhi, Alireza Ghaffarieh, Seon Ho Kim, Cyrus Shahabi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pathology informatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Roshanak AlialyDepartment of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Sasan TavakkolDepartment of Computer Science, Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Elham TavakkolTelemedicine Research Center, National Research Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases (NRITLD), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Amir Ghorbani-AghbologhiDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Alireza GhaffariehDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Seon Ho KimDepartment of Computer Science, Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Cyrus ShahabiDepartment of Computer Science, Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advent of the digital pathology has introduced new avenues of diagnostic medicine. Among them, crowdsourcing has attracted researchers' attention in the recent years, allowing them to engage thousands of untrained individuals in research and diagnosis. While there exist several articles in this regard, prior works have not collectively documented them. We, therefore, aim to review the applications of crowdsourcing in human pathology in a semi-systematic manner. We first, introduce a novel method to do a systematic search of the literature. Utilizing this method, we, then, collect hundreds of articles and screen them against a predefined set of criteria. Furthermore, we crowdsource part of the screening process, to examine another potential application of crowdsourcing. Finally, we review the selected articles and characterize the prior uses of crowdsourcing in pathology.

Indexed as

Citizen sciencecrowdsourcingpathologysystematic search

Identifiers

PMID29531847
PMCPMC5841017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.