ArticleExpert systems with applications2023
Actual rating calculation of the zoom cloud meetings app using user reviews on google play store with sentiment annotation of BERT and hybridization of RNN and LSTM.
Article in Expert systems with applications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring climate smart agriculture in Turkey: Enhancing food security and sustainable practices for the reduction of CO₂ emissions.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Unpacking the Drivers of Dissatisfaction and Satisfaction in a Fitness Mobile Application.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent outbreaks of the COVID-19 forced people to work from home. All the educational institutes run their academic activities online. The online meeting app the "Zoom Cloud Meeting" provides the most entire supports for this purpose. For providing proper functionalities require in this situation of online supports the developers need the frequent release of new versions of the application. Which makes the chances to have lots of bugs during the release of new versions. To fix those bugs introduce developer needs users' feedback based on the new release of the application. But most of the time the ratings and reviews are created contraposition between them because of the users' inadvertent in giving ratings and reviews. And it has been the main problem to fix those bugs using user ratings for software developers. For this reason, we conduct this average rating calculation process based on the sentiment of user reviews to help software developers. We use BERT-based sentiment annotation to create unbiased datasets and hybridize RNN with LSTM to find calculated ratings based on the unbiased reviews dataset. Out of four models trained on four different datasets, we found promising performance in two datasets containing a necessarily large amount of unbiased reviews. The results show that the reviews have more positive sentiments than the actual ratings. Our results found an average of 3.60 stars rating, where the actual average rating found in dataset is 3.08 stars. We use reviews of more than 250 apps from the Google Play app store. The results of our can provide more promising if we can use a large dataset only containing the reviews of the Zoom Cloud Meeting app.
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.