Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37738080›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2023

Automatic Extraction of Research Themes in Epidemiological Criminology From PubMed Abstracts From 1946 to 2020: Text Mining Study.

George Karystianis, Paul Simpson, Wilson Lukmanjaya, Natasha Ginnivan, Goran Nenadic, Iain Buchan, Tony Butler

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

George KarystianisSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3491-361X
Paul SimpsonSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1947-8923
Wilson LukmanjayaSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7747-4648
Natasha GinnivanSchool of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8581-6812
Goran NenadicSchool of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Manchestr, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0795-5363
Iain BuchanInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3392-1650
Tony ButlerSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2679-2769

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe emerging field of epidemiological criminology studies the intersection between public health and justice systems. To increase the value of and reduce waste in research activities in this area, it is important to perform transparent research priority setting considering the needs of research beneficiaries and end users along with a systematic assessment of the existing research activities to address gaps and harness opportunities.

objectiveIn this study, we aimed to examine published research outputs in epidemiological criminology to assess gaps between published outputs and current research priorities identified by prison stakeholders.

methodsA rule-based method was applied to 23,904 PubMed epidemiological criminology abstracts to extract the study determinants and outcomes (ie, "themes"). These were mapped against the research priorities identified by Australian prison stakeholders to assess the differences from research outputs. The income level of the affiliation country of the first authors was also identified to compare the ranking of research priorities in countries categorized by income levels.

resultsOn an evaluation set of 100 abstracts, the identification of themes returned an F

conclusionsThe identification of research themes from PubMed epidemiological criminology research abstracts is possible through the application of a rule-based text mining method. The frequency of the investigated themes may reflect historical developments concerning disease prevalence, treatment advances, and the social understanding of illness and incarcerated populations. The differences between income status groups are likely to be explained by local health priorities and immediate health risks. Notable gaps between stakeholder research priorities and research outputs concerned themes that were more focused on social factors and systems and may reflect publication bias or self-publication selection, highlighting the need for further research on prison health services and the social determinants of health. Different jurisdictions, countries, and regions should undertake similar systematic and transparent research priority-setting processes.

Indexed as

criminologyepidemiological criminologyepidemiologyopen researchPubMedresearch prioritiesstudy determinantstudy outcome

Identifiers

PMID37738080
PMCPMC10559193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.