Chappell Mary, Edwards Mary, Watkins Deborah, Marshall Christopher, Graziadio Sara
York Health Economics Consortium, Enterprise House, Innovation Way University of York York UK.
Cochrane Evid Synth Methods. 2023 Jul 20;1(5):e12021. doi: 10.1002/cesm.12021. eCollection 2023 Jul.
Evidence reviews are important for informing decision-making and primary research, but they can be time-consuming and costly. With the advent of artificial intelligence, including machine learning, there is an opportunity to accelerate the review process at many stages, with study screening identified as a prime candidate for assistance. Despite the availability of a large number of tools promising to assist with study screening, these are not consistently used in practice and there is skepticism about their application. Single-arm evaluations suggest the potential for tools to reduce screening burden. However, their integration into practice may need further investigation through evaluations of outcomes such as overall resource use and impact on review findings and recommendations. Because the literature lacks comparative studies, it is not currently possible to determine their relative accuracy. In this commentary, we outline the published research and discuss options for incorporating tools into the review workflow, considering the needs and requirements of different types of review.
证据综述对于为决策和初步研究提供信息很重要,但可能耗时且成本高昂。随着包括机器学习在内的人工智能的出现,有机会在许多阶段加速综述过程,研究筛选被视为最适合获得帮助的环节。尽管有大量声称可协助研究筛选的工具,但在实践中它们并未得到一致使用,人们对其应用也持怀疑态度。单臂评估表明这些工具具有减轻筛选负担的潜力。然而,它们在实践中的整合可能需要通过对诸如总体资源使用以及对综述结果和建议的影响等结果进行评估来进一步研究。由于文献中缺乏比较研究,目前尚无法确定它们的相对准确性。在这篇评论中,我们概述已发表的研究,并考虑不同类型综述的需求和要求,讨论将工具纳入综述工作流程的选项。