Performance of active learning models for screening prioritization in systematic reviews: a simulation study into the Average Time to Discover relevant records

被引:34
作者
Ferdinands, Gerbrich [1 ]
Schram, Raoul [2 ]
de Bruin, Jonathan [2 ]
Bagheri, Ayoub [1 ]
Oberski, Daniel L. [1 ]
Tummers, Lars [3 ]
Teijema, Jelle Jasper [1 ]
Van de Schoot, Rens [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Utrecht, Fac Social & Behav Sci, Dept Methodol & Stat, Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Utrecht, Dept Res & Data Management Serv, Informat Technol Serv, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Univ Utrecht, Fac Law Econ & Governance, Sch Governance, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
Systematic reviews; Active learning; Screening prioritization; Machine learning; Data mining; Computer simulation; WORKLOAD;
D O I
10.1186/s13643-023-02257-7
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BackgroundConducting a systematic review demands a significant amount of effort in screening titles and abstracts. To accelerate this process, various tools that utilize active learning have been proposed. These tools allow the reviewer to interact with machine learning software to identify relevant publications as early as possible. The goal of this study is to gain a comprehensive understanding of active learning models for reducing the workload in systematic reviews through a simulation study.MethodsThe simulation study mimics the process of a human reviewer screening records while interacting with an active learning model. Different active learning models were compared based on four classification techniques (naive Bayes, logistic regression, support vector machines, and random forest) and two feature extraction strategies (TF-IDF and doc2vec). The performance of the models was compared for six systematic review datasets from different research areas. The evaluation of the models was based on the Work Saved over Sampling (WSS) and recall. Additionally, this study introduces two new statistics, Time to Discovery (TD) and Average Time to Discovery (ATD).ResultsThe models reduce the number of publications needed to screen by 91.7 to 63.9% while still finding 95% of all relevant records (WSS@95). Recall of the models was defined as the proportion of relevant records found after screening 10% of of all records and ranges from 53.6 to 99.8%. The ATD values range from 1.4% till 11.7%, which indicate the average proportion of labeling decisions the researcher needs to make to detect a relevant record. The ATD values display a similar ranking across the simulations as the recall and WSS values.ConclusionsActive learning models for screening prioritization demonstrate significant potential for reducing the workload in systematic reviews. The Naive Bayes + TF-IDF model yielded the best results overall. The Average Time to Discovery (ATD) measures performance of active learning models throughout the entire screening process without the need for an arbitrary cut-off point. This makes the ATD a promising metric for comparing the performance of different models across different datasets.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 62 条
[1]  
Aggarwal CharuC., 2012, MINING TEXT DATA, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-3223-4.6
[2]   Text categorization models for high-quality article retrieval in internal medicine [J].
Aphinyanaphongs, Y ;
Tsamardinos, I ;
Statnikov, A ;
Hardin, D ;
Aliferis, CF .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2005, 12 (02) :207-216
[3]  
Appenzeller-Herzog Christian, 2020, Zenodo, DOI 10.5281/ZENODO.3625931
[4]   Comparative effectiveness of common therapies for Wilson disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled studies [J].
Appenzeller-Herzog, Christian ;
Mathes, Tim ;
Heeres, Marlies L. S. ;
Weiss, Karl Heinz ;
Houwen, Roderick H. J. ;
Ewald, Hannah .
LIVER INTERNATIONAL, 2019, 39 (11) :2136-2152
[5]  
ASReview LAB developers, 2022, Zenodo, DOI 10.5281/ZENODO.7418934
[6]  
ASReview LAB developers, 2022, Zenodo, DOI 10.5281/ZENODO.7319063
[7]  
ASReview LAB developers, 2023, ASREVIEW MAKITA
[8]  
Bergstra J., 2013, P 30 INT C MACH LEAR, P115, DOI DOI 10.5555/3042817.3042832
[9]  
Bleijendaal H, 2022, IN PRESS, P1050
[10]   Analysis of the time and workers needed to conduct systematic reviews of medical interventions using data from the PROSPERO registry [J].
Borah, Rohit ;
Brown, Andrew W. ;
Capers, Patrice L. ;
Kaiser, Kathryn A. .
BMJ OPEN, 2017, 7 (02)