ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2019
Applying a Computer-Assisted Tool for Semantic Analysis of Writing: Uses for STEM and ELL.
Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Filial Care in Transition: Linguistic and Emotional Patterns in Online Discourse Among Emerging Adults in Taiwan.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- ChatGPT and Artificial Intelligence in Medical Writing: Concerns and Ethical Considerations.Cureus · 2023Article
- Conclusiveness, linguistic characteristics and readability of Cochrane plain language summaries of intervention reviews: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- A Systematic Approach To Promote Environmental Engineering Students' Learning in Environmental Molecular Microbiology.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2021Article
- Antiracist Opportunities in theJournal of microbiology & biology education · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In addition to human, close reading of student text with rubrics for assessment, educators use nonhuman, distant computer-assisted tools to help quantitatively measure otherwise qualitative keywords to prevent bias in grading and help
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.