ArticleSystematic reviews2020
A focus on cross-purpose tools, automated recognition of study design in multiple disciplines, and evaluation of automation tools: a summary of significant discussions at the fourth meeting of the International Collaboration for Automation of Systematic Reviews (ICASR).
Article in Systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Building a synthesis-ready research ecosystem: fostering collaboration and open science to accelerate biomedical translation.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of semi-automated record screening methods for systematic reviews of prognosis studies and intervention studies.Research synthesis methods · 2025Article
- Article
- Enhancing the quality and efficiency of regulatory science literature reviews through innovation and collaboration with library and information science experts.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Evaluation of publication type tagging as a strategy to screen randomized controlled trial articles in preparing systematic reviews.JAMIA open · 2022Article
- Article
- Application of evidence-based methods to construct mechanism-driven chemical assessment frameworks.ALTEX · 2022Article
- Knowledge Organization Systems for Systematic Chemical Assessments.Environmental health perspectives · 2020Article
- Development, testing and use of data extraction forms in systematic reviews: a review of methodological guidance.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The fourth meeting of the International Collaboration for Automation of Systematic Reviews (ICASR) was held 5-6 November 2019 in The Hague, the Netherlands. ICASR is an interdisciplinary group whose goal is to maximize the use of technology for conducting rapid, accurate, and efficient systematic reviews of scientific evidence. The group seeks to facilitate the development and acceptance of automated techniques for systematic reviews. In 2018, the major themes discussed were the transferability of automation tools (i.e., tools developed for other purposes that might be used by systematic reviewers), the automated recognition of study design in multiple disciplines and applications, and approaches for the evaluation of automation tools.
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.