The DOI matches its Crossref record; 90 of the 90 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Erratum to: Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches
Open accessAbstract
Following publication of our article [1], it has come to our attention that two of the formulae in Table 1 were incorrect.The formulae for the measures of precision and burden have been corrected (Table 1).We are publishing this erratum to update these formulae to the following:
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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
Pan, S. J., & Yang, Q. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2009.191 · Cited by 23,387
The relationship between Precision-Recall and ROC curves
Davis, J., & Goadrich, M. (2006) · Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning - ICML '06 · doi:10.1145/1143844.1143874 · Cited by 6,559
(2009) · Minds at UW (University of Wisconsin) · Cited by 4,791
A survey on concept drift adaptation
Gama, J., Žliobaitė, I., Bifet, A., Pechenizkiy, M., & Bouchachia, A. (2014) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/2523813 · Cited by 3,735
Addressing the Curse of Imbalanced Training Sets: One-Sided Selection.
Kubát, M., & Matwin, S. (1997) · Cited by 2,230
The foundations of cost-sensitive learning
Elkan, C. (2001) · Cited by 1,945
Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews
Mulrow, C. D. (1994) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.309.6954.597 · Cited by 1,677
An Introduction to Systematic Reviews
Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017) · doi:10.4135/9781036234942 · Cited by 1,239
Self-citationSeventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?
Bastian, H., Glasziou, P., & Chalmers, I. (2010) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326 · Cited by 1,188
(1976) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/tsmc.1976.4309452 · Cited by 1,078
Cited by
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n71 · Cited by 108,283
Self-citationRayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews.
Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 · Cited by 26,092
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4 · Cited by 13,874
Self-citationPage, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n160 · Cited by 13,262
Self-citationThe PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906 · Cited by 11,748
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- O’Mara-Eves, A., Thomas, J., McNaught, J., Miwa, M., & Ananiadou, S.
- Venue
- Systematic Reviews
- Published
- 2015-04-28
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 59-59
- ISSN
- 2046-4053 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2147469877
- Cited by
- 353
- References
- 90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Erratum to: Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13643-015-0031-5
- The paper
- O’Mara-Eves, A., Thomas, J., McNaught, J., Miwa, M., & Ananiadou, S. (2015). Erratum to: Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches. Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0031-5
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.
