ArticleTechnological forecasting and social change2017
Science foresight using life-cycle analysis, text mining and clustering: A case study on natural ventilation.
Article in Technological forecasting and social change, 2017. 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.
- Framing the Convergence of One Health and Digital Health in the Global South With a Gender-Sensitive Foresight Perspective: Delphi Study Using Latent Semantic Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Leveraging Sentiment-Topic Analysis for Understanding the Psychological Role of Hype in Emerging Technologies-A Case Study of Electric Vehicles.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Using the big data analysis and basic information from lecture Halls to predict air change rate.Journal of building engineering · 2023Article
- Article
- An overview of literature on COVID-19, MERS and SARS: Using text mining and latent Dirichlet allocation.Journal of information science · 2022Article
- Detecting trends in academic research from a citation network using network representation learning.PloS one · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Science foresight comprises a range of methods to analyze past, present and expected research trends, and uses this information to predict the future status of different fields of science and technology. With the ability to identify high-potential development directions, science foresight can be a useful tool to support the management and planning of future research activities. Science foresight analysts can choose from a rather large variety of approaches. There is, however, relatively little information about how the various approaches can be applied in an effective way. This paper describes a three-step methodological framework for science foresight on the basis of published research papers, consisting of (i) life-cycle analysis, (ii) text mining and (iii) knowledge gap identification by means of automated clustering. The three steps are connected using the research methodology of the research papers, as identified by text mining. The potential of combining these three steps in one framework is illustrated by analyzing scientific literature on wind catchers; a natural ventilation concept which has received considerable attention from academia, but with quite low application in practice. The knowledge gaps that are identified show that the automated foresight analysis is indeed able to find uncharted research areas. Results from a sensitivity analysis further show the importance of using full-texts for text mining instead of only title, keywords and abstract. The paper concludes with a reflection on the methodological framework, and gives directions for its intended use in future studies.
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.