SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Data Extraction and Synthesis in Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy: A Corpus for Automating and Evaluating the Process
8 references·0 citing·38 second hop
Data Extraction and Synthesis in Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy: A Corpus for Automating and Evaluating the Process (2018)Data Extraction and Synthesis in Systemat…Three Dimensions of Reproducibility in Natural Language Processing (2018)Three Dimensions of Reproduci…What does research reproducibility mean? (2016)What does research reproducib…1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility (2016)1,500 scientists lift the lid…Erratum to: Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches (2015)Erratum to: Using text mining…Systematic review automation technologies (2014)Systematic review automation …Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (2008)Systematic Reviews of Diagnos…Reducing Workload in Systematic Review Preparation Using Automated Citation Classification (2005)Reducing Workload in Systemat…Methodology and Reports of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (1998)Methodology and Reports of Sy…The American Heritage Word Frequency Book (1973)Developing Optimal Search Strategies for Detecting Clinically Sound Studies in MEDLINE (1994)Semi-automated screening of biomedical citations for systematic reviews (2010)Automating data extraction in systematic reviews: a systematic review (2015)The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews (2003)Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative (2003)Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews (2005)Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies Evaluating Diagnostic Test Accuracy: A Practical Review for Clinical Researchers-Part II. Statistical Methods of Meta-Analysis (2015)A guide to systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic factor studies (2019)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA): explanation, elaboration, and checklist (2020)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses? (2000)The inclusion of reports of randomised trials published in languages other than English in systematic reviews (2003)Religion/spirituality and adolescent health outcomes: a review (2006)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)An automated approach to identifying search terms for systematic reviews using keyword co‐occurrence networks (2019)Fact or Fiction: Verifying Scientific Claims (2020)Automation of systematic literature reviews: A systematic literature review (2021)Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews (1994)Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? (2010)An Introduction to Systematic Reviews (2013)Evidence & Gap Maps: A tool for promoting evidence informed policy and strategic research agendas (2016)Living systematic reviews: 2. Combining human and machine effort (2017)The value of a second reviewer for study selection in systematic reviews (2019)Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility (2014)The Galaxy platform for accessible, reproducible and collaborative biomedical analyses: 2016 update (2016)A solution to minimum sample size for regressions (2020)CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials (2025)CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials (2025)Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts (2007)Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (2015)Can reproducibility be improved in clinical natural language processing? A study of 7 clinical NLP suites (2020)A Metrological Perspective on Reproducibility in NLP* (2022)French CrowS-Pairs: Extending a challenge dataset for measuring social bias in masked language models to a language other than English (2022)A manifesto for reproducible science (2017)Bioconda: sustainable and comprehensive software distribution for the life sciences (2018)The nf-core framework for community-curated bioinformatics pipelines (2020)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 20161,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility4,200 cited
  • 2016What does research reproducibility mean?1,291 cited
  • 2008Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy1,124 cited
  • 1998Methodology and Reports of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses534 cited
  • 2014Systematic review automation technologies471 cited
  • 2005Reducing Workload in Systematic Review Preparation Using Automated Citation Classification410 cited
  • 2015Erratum to: Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches353 cited
  • 2018Three Dimensions of Reproducibility in Natural Language Processing43 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work