Cited by 22Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologiesscientometrics and bibliometrics research

Developing a fully automated evidence synthesis tool for identifying, assessing and collating the evidence

Brassey, Jon, Price, Christopher, Edwards, Jonny, Zlabinger, Markus, Bampoulidis, Alexandros, Hanbury, Allan·2021·BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine

Abstract

Evidence synthesis is a key element of evidence-based medicine. However, it is currently hampered by being labour intensive meaning that many trials are not incorporated into robust evidence syntheses and that many are out of date. To overcome this, a variety of techniques are being explored, including using automation technology. Here, we describe a fully automated evidence synthesis system for intervention studies, one that identifies all the relevant evidence, assesses the evidence for reliability and collates it to estimate the relative effectiveness of an intervention. Techniques used include machine learning, natural language processing and rule-based systems. Results are visualised using modern visualisation techniques. We believe this to be the first, publicly available, automated evidence synthesis system: an evidence mapping tool that synthesises evidence on the fly.

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 · 10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111126

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brassey, J., Price, C., Edwards, J., Zlabinger, M., Bampoulidis, A., & Hanbury, A.
Affiliations
  • TU Wien (AT)
  • Research Studios Austria (AT)
Corresponding author
Brassey, Jon
Venue
BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2019-08-29
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
24-27
ISSN
  • 1356-5524 (ISSN-L)
  • 2515-446X
  • 2515-4478
OpenAlex
W2970126114
Cited by
22
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3
FWCI
2.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (No 644753 (KConnect))
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Keywords
evidence mapping, evidence-based medicine, intervention research, machine learning, natural language processing, rule-based systems
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Automation, Humans, Natural Language Processing, Reproducibility of Results

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