Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 6

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The hunt for the last relevant paper: blending the best of humans and AI

van de Schoot, Rens, Messina Coimbra, Bruno, Evenhuis, Tale, Lombaers, Peter, Weijdema, Felix, de Bruin, Laurens, Neeleman, Rutger, Grandfield, Elizabeth, Sijbrandij, Marit, Teijema, Jelle Jasper, Jalsovec, Elena, Bron, Michiel Pieter, Winter, Sonja, de Bruin, Jonathan, van Zuiden, Mirjam·2025·European Journal of Psychotraumatology
DOI 10.1080/20008066.2025.2546214PMC PMC12529749
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/20008066.2025.2546214

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1. Panel (a) illustrates a hypothetical comparison of a precise versus a sensitive search, showing that even a sensitive approach can still overlook relevant papers. In Panel (b), we propose a solution combining traditional, human-based methods and machine- or AI-aided search methods, capturing more potentially relevant papers at the cost of retrieving many more irrelevant ones. An active learning model helps prioritise the most likely relevant papers for screening, and a large language model double-checks excluded labels to minimise the risk of missing crucial studies. However, even with the best human and AI efforts combined, there may still be a relevant paper left undiscovered. Art-work based on the work by Goudeau and Manten (2024).
Figure 1. Panel (a) illustrates a hypothetical comparison of a precise versus a sensitive search, showing that even a sensitive approach can still overlook relevant papers. In Panel (b), we propose a solution combining traditional, human-based methods and machine- or AI-aided search methods, capturing more potentially relevant papers at the cost of retrieving many more irrelevant ones. An active learning model helps prioritise the most likely relevant papers for screening, and a large language model double-checks excluded labels to minimise the risk of missing crucial studies. However, even with the best human and AI efforts combined, there may still be a relevant paper left undiscovered. Art-work based on the work by Goudeau and Manten (2024).CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 2. Overview of the two phases of the current study, combining the best of human and AI-aided searching and screening. The two symbols indicate whether the results are based on human effort or were AI-assisted.
Figure 2. Overview of the two phases of the current study, combining the best of human and AI-aided searching and screening. The two symbols indicate whether the results are based on human effort or were AI-assisted.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 3. Stacked bar charts showing the progression of records through each screening phase. This figure visualises how records from each screening phase – including Synergy (re-labelled original records) and the various FORAS screening phases – were advanced, excluded, or newly included at the title–abstract screening stage (TI-AB) or Full-tekst (FT) per inclusion criterion (IC). The chart highlights how different methods (human, LLM) contributed unique, relevant records to the final dataset.
Figure 3. Stacked bar charts showing the progression of records through each screening phase. This figure visualises how records from each screening phase – including Synergy (re-labelled original records) and the various FORAS screening phases – were advanced, excluded, or newly included at the title–abstract screening stage (TI-AB) or Full-tekst (FT) per inclusion criterion (IC). The chart highlights how different methods (human, LLM) contributed unique, relevant records to the final dataset.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 4. PRISMA flowchart summarising the complete process. The left-hand path (annotated as ‘Synergy’) shows the re-labelling and re-evaluation of the original dataset from Van De Schoot et al. (2017). The right-hand path reflects newly identified records screened during the FORAS update. Final totals are shown after integration of both sources. The two symbols indicate whether the step is human-based or AI-driven.
Figure 4. PRISMA flowchart summarising the complete process. The left-hand path (annotated as ‘Synergy’) shows the re-labelling and re-evaluation of the original dataset from Van De Schoot et al. (2017). The right-hand path reflects newly identified records screened during the FORAS update. Final totals are shown after integration of both sources. The two symbols indicate whether the step is human-based or AI-driven.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 5. When a new search method is added, additional records (ktotal) must be screened to identify a certain number of TI-AB inclusions (kTIAB).
Figure 5. When a new search method is added, additional records (ktotal) must be screened to identify a certain number of TI-AB inclusions (kTIAB).CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 6. Venn diagram illustrating full-text (FT) inclusions across different search methods. Circles represent the various methods; small yellow dots indicate the FT inclusions, and larger white dots represent the five unique papers we highlight. We combined the replication with the comprehensive searches and merged the three OpenAlex pipelines for simplicity.
Figure 6. Venn diagram illustrating full-text (FT) inclusions across different search methods. Circles represent the various methods; small yellow dots indicate the FT inclusions, and larger white dots represent the five unique papers we highlight. We combined the replication with the comprehensive searches and merged the three OpenAlex pipelines for simplicity.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 25 references

Research works printed but not linked: 59

  1. Alonso-Alvarez P. & Eck N. J. v. (2024). Coverage and metadata availability of African publications in OpenAlex: A comparative analysis. In: arXiv. · DOI
  2. 10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Bron M. P. Greijn B. Coimbra B. M. Schoot R. v. d. & Bagheri A. (2024). Combining large language model classifications and active learning for improved technology-assisted review. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3770/paper8.pdf
  4. 10.17605/OSF.IO/6MJTD · DOI
  5. 10.1186/s12888-023-05460-x · DOI
  6. 10.1186/s13643-024-02587-0 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1037/amp0000958 · DOI
  8. 10.1111/cobi.13117 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1197/jamia.M3162 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.17605/OSF.IO/QABW3 · DOI
  11. 10.17605/OSF.IO/D3UV5 · DOI
  12. 10.17605/OSF.IO/B9GD3 · DOI
  13. 10.34894/CRE6ZC · DOI
  14. 10.17605/OSF.IO/7EXC5 · DOI
  15. 10.1186/s13643-024-02575-4 · DOI
  16. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.04.012 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02419-7 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.4236/ojepi.2023.134026 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/j.ssmph.2023.101575 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1002/da.20845 · DOI
  21. 10.1007/s10608-016-9770-4 · DOI
  22. 10.34894/3TJNLH · DOI
  23. 10.1192/bjo.2019.62 · DOI
  24. 10.1002/9781119536604 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1162/qss_a_00228 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.08.020 · DOI
  27. 10.17997/swry.75.1.3 · DOI
  28. 10.1002/9780470712184.ch6 · DOI
  29. 10.3390/app14093842 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.17605/OSF.IO/M32TS · DOI
  31. Maddi A. Maisonobe M. & Boukacem-Zeghmouri C. (2024). Geographical and disciplinary coverage of open access journals: OpenAlex scopus and WoS. In: arXiv. · DOI
  32. 10.1109/TPAMI.2018.2889473 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.18653/v1/P17-4002 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 10.23736/s2724-6612.21.02158-0 · DOI
  35. 10.1186/s13643-024-02472-w · DOI · Paper page
  36. 10.1186/s13643-018-0786-6 · DOI
  37. 10.1016/j.paid.2021.111493 · DOI
  38. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.027 · DOI
  39. Priem J. Piwowar H. & Orr R. (2022). OpenAlex: A fully-open index of scholarly works authors venues institutions and concepts. In: arXiv.
  40. 10.71465/fair43 · DOI
  41. 10.1371/journal.pone.0063545 · DOI
  42. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199006)41:4<288::AID-ASI8>3.0.CO;2-H · DOI
  43. Scherbakov D. Hubig N. Jansari V. Bakumenko A. & Lenert L. A. (2024). The emergence of Large Language Models (LLM) as a tool in literature reviews: An LLM automated systematic review. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.04600. · DOI · Paper page
  44. 10.1038/s41591-020-0951-z · DOI
  45. 10.1017/S0033291721004025 · DOI
  46. Syriani E. David I. & Kumar G. (2023). Assessing the ability of chatgpt to screen articles for systematic reviews. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.06464. · arXiv
  47. 10.31234/osf.io/2w3rm · DOI
  48. Teijema J. Seuren S. Anadria D. Bagheri A. & van de Schoot R. (2023). Simulation-based active learning for systematic reviews: A systematic review of the literature. psyarxiv.com/67zmt. · DOI · Paper page
  49. 10.17605/OSF.IO/QP75F · DOI
  50. 10.1016/j.simpa.2024.100663 · DOI · Paper page
  51. 10.17605/OSF.IO/B9GD3 · DOI
  52. 10.1080/10705511.2016.1247646 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 10.3389/frma.2021.685591 · DOI · Paper page
  54. 10.1007/s11192-019-03264-z · DOI · Paper page
  55. 10.1145/2110363.2110464 · DOI · Paper page
  56. Wang L. Yang N. Huang X. Yang L. Majumder R. & Wei F. (2024). Multilingual E5 text embeddings: A technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.05672. · arXiv
  57. Wangwang, O., Yuhong, L., Lianghui, M., & Xiaorui, H. (2023). Development trajectory and influencing factors of pediatric medical traumatic stress in parents with children undergoing surgery: A latent growth mixture model. Chinese Journal of Practical Nursing, 1620–1627.
  58. 10.17605/OSF.IO/VK4BE · DOI
  59. 10.17605/OSF.IO/VK4BE · DOI

Cited by

See all 6

Metadata

Authors
van de Schoot, R., Messina Coimbra, B., Evenhuis, T., Lombaers, P., Weijdema, F., de Bruin, L., Neeleman, R., Grandfield, E., Sijbrandij, M., Teijema, J. J., Jalsovec, E., Bron, M. P., Winter, S., de Bruin, J., & van Zuiden, M.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University
  • University of Applied Sciences Utrecht
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
  • University of Missouri
ORCID
Venue
European Journal of Psychotraumatology
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2025-10-15
Volume
16
Issue
1
ISSN
2000-8066
DOI
10.1080/20008066.2025.2546214
PMC
PMC12529749
Cited by
6
References
25
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (vor)
Funders
  • Dutch Research Council
  • Social Sciences and Humanities (406.22.GO.048)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The hunt for the last relevant paper: blending the best of humans and AI. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/20008066.2025.2546214
The paper
van de Schoot, R., Messina Coimbra, B., Evenhuis, T., Lombaers, P., Weijdema, F., de Bruin, L., Neeleman, R., Grandfield, E., Sijbrandij, M., Teijema, J. J., Jalsovec, E., Bron, M. P., Winter, S., de Bruin, J., & van Zuiden, M. (2025). The hunt for the last relevant paper: blending the best of humans and AI. European Journal of Psychotraumatology. https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2025.2546214

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.