ArticleHeliyon2021
Intelligent transportation systems (ITS): A systematic review using a Natural Language Processing (NLP) approach.
Article in Heliyon, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tracking the dynamic evolution of lithium-ion battery recycling technology using natural language processing.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- HDSVT: High-Density Semantic Vehicle Trajectory Dataset Based on a Cosmopolitan City Bridge.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Advancements in accident-aware traffic management: a comprehensive review of V2X-based route optimization.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of RMES, an Automated Software Tool Utilizing AI, for Literature Screening with Reference to Published Systematic Reviews as Case-Studies: Development and Usability Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) is not a new concept. Notably, ITS has been cited in various journal articles and proceedings papers around the world, and it has become increasingly popular. Additionally, ITS involves multidisciplinary science. The growing number of journal articles makes ITS reviews complicated, and research gaps can be difficult to identify. The existing software for systematic reviews still relies on highly laborious tasks, manual reading, and a homogeneous dataset of research articles. This study proposes a framework that can address these issues, return a comprehensive systematic review of ITS, and promote efficient systematic reviews. The proposed framework consists of Natural Language Processing (NLP) methods i.e., Named Entity Recognition (NER), Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), and word embedding (continuous skip-gram). It enables this study to explore the context of research articles and their overall interpretation to determine and define the directions of knowledge growth and ITS development. The framework can systematically separate unrelated documents and simplify the review process for large dataset. To our knowledge, compared to prior research regarding systematic review of ITS, this study offers more thorough review.
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.