Jelicic Kadic Antonia, Vucic Katarina, Dosenovic Svjetlana, Sapunar Damir, Puljak Livia
Cochrane Croatia, University of Split School of Medicine, Soltanska 2, 21000 Split, Croatia.
Department for Quality, Safety and Efficacy Assessment of Medicinal Products, Agency for medicinal products and medical devices, Ksaverska cesta 4, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jun;74:119-23. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.002. Epub 2016 Jan 11.
To compare speed and accuracy of graphical data extraction using manual estimation and open source software.
Data points from eligible graphs/figures published in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 2009 to 2014 were extracted by two authors independently, both by manual estimation and with the Plot Digitizer, open source software. Corresponding authors of each RCT were contacted up to four times via e-mail to obtain exact numbers that were used to create graphs. Accuracy of each method was compared against the source data from which the original graphs were produced.
Software data extraction was significantly faster, reducing time for extraction for 47%. Percent agreement between the two raters was 51% for manual and 53.5% for software data extraction. Percent agreement between the raters and original data was 66% vs. 75% for the first rater and 69% vs. 73% for the second rater, for manual and software extraction, respectively.
Data extraction from figures should be conducted using software, whereas manual estimation should be avoided. Using software for data extraction of data presented only in figures is faster and enables higher interrater reliability.
比较使用人工估算和开源软件进行图形数据提取的速度和准确性。
2009年至2014年发表的随机对照试验（RCT）中符合条件的图表中的数据点由两位作者分别通过人工估算和使用开源软件Plot Digitizer独立提取。通过电子邮件最多联系每个RCT的通讯作者四次，以获取用于创建图表的确切数字。将每种方法的准确性与生成原始图表的源数据进行比较。
软件数据提取速度明显更快，提取时间减少了47%。两位评估者之间的一致性百分比，人工提取为51%，软件数据提取为53.5%。对于人工提取和软件提取，评估者与原始数据之间的一致性百分比，第一位评估者分别为66%对75%，第二位评估者分别为69%对73%。
应使用软件从图表中提取数据，而应避免人工估算。使用软件对仅以图表形式呈现的数据进行数据提取速度更快，并且能实现更高的评估者间可靠性。
