Accuracy and Efficiency of Machine Learning–Assisted Risk-of-Bias Assessments in “Real-World” Systematic Reviews

医学 系统回顾 随机对照试验 随机化 心理干预 物理疗法 梅德林 外科 护理部 政治学 法学
作者
Anneliese Arno,James Thomas,Byron Wallace,Iain Marshall,Joanne E. McKenzie,Julian Elliott
出处
期刊:Annals of Internal Medicine [American College of Physicians]
卷期号:175 (7): 1001-1009 被引量:15
标识
DOI:10.7326/m22-0092
摘要

Background: Automation is a proposed solution for the increasing difficulty of maintaining up-to-date, high-quality health evidence. Evidence assessing the effectiveness of semiautomated data synthesis, such as risk-of-bias (RoB) assessments, is lacking. Objective: To determine whether RobotReviewer-assisted RoB assessments are noninferior in accuracy and efficiency to assessments conducted with human effort only. Design: Two-group, parallel, noninferiority, randomized trial. (Monash Research Office Project 11256) Setting: Health-focused systematic reviews using Covidence. Participants: Systematic reviewers, who had not previously used RobotReviewer, completing Cochrane RoB assessments between February 2018 and May 2020. Intervention: In the intervention group, reviewers received an RoB form prepopulated by RobotReviewer; in the comparison group, reviewers received a blank form. Studies were assigned in a 1:1 ratio via simple randomization to receive RobotReviewer assistance for either Reviewer 1 or Reviewer 2. Participants were blinded to study allocation before starting work on each RoB form. Measurements: Co-primary outcomes were the accuracy of individual reviewer RoB assessments and the person-time required to complete individual assessments. Domain-level RoB accuracy was a secondary outcome. Results: Of the 15 recruited review teams, 7 completed the trial (145 included studies). Integration of RobotReviewer resulted in noninferior overall RoB assessment accuracy (risk difference, −0.014 [95% CI, −0.093 to 0.065]; intervention group: 88.8% accurate assessments; control group: 90.2% accurate assessments). Data were inconclusive for the person-time outcome (RobotReviewer saved 1.40 minutes [CI, −5.20 to 2.41 minutes]). Limitation: Variability in user behavior and a limited number of assessable reviews led to an imprecise estimate of the time outcome. Conclusion: In health-related systematic reviews, RoB assessments conducted with RobotReviewer assistance are noninferior in accuracy to those conducted without RobotReviewer assistance. Primary Funding Source: University College London and Monash University.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
1秒前
1秒前
1秒前
1秒前
1秒前
Jasper应助半夏采纳,获得10
2秒前
可爱的函函应助ll采纳,获得10
2秒前
倩_完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
djxdjt完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
3秒前
3秒前
王秋田应助罗梦芬采纳,获得20
4秒前
4秒前
4秒前
4秒前
熠熠完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
whynot发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
4秒前
现代山雁发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
5秒前
LLLLLL发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
香蕉觅云应助朝俞采纳,获得10
5秒前
知名不具完成签到 ,获得积分10
6秒前
wei发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
7秒前
影子发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
油麦菜完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
mafukairi发布了新的文献求助30
8秒前
hanlin完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
利于蓄力发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
清心发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
11秒前
11秒前
wanci应助科研废物采纳,获得10
12秒前
隐形曼青应助chen采纳,获得10
12秒前
XRH完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
13秒前
whynot完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
彩色阳光完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
浮游应助任性宇豪采纳,获得10
14秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
SOFT MATTER SERIES Volume 22 Soft Matter in Foods 1000
Zur lokalen Geoidbestimmung aus terrestrischen Messungen vertikaler Schweregradienten 1000
Storie e culture della televisione 500
Selected research on camelid physiology and nutrition 500
《2023南京市住宿行业发展报告》 500
Food Microbiology - An Introduction (5th Edition) 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 医学 生物 材料科学 工程类 有机化学 内科学 生物化学 物理 计算机科学 纳米技术 遗传学 基因 复合材料 化学工程 物理化学 病理 催化作用 免疫学 量子力学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 4884713
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 4169858
关于积分的说明 12939294
捐赠科研通 3930463
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2156559
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1174925
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1079670