Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Automatic categorization of self-acknowledged limitations in randomized controlled trial publications
6
Zitationen
5
Autoren
2024
Jahr
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Acknowledging study limitations in a scientific publication is a crucial element in scientific transparency and progress. However, limitation reporting is often inadequate. Natural language processing (NLP) methods could support automated reporting checks, improving research transparency. In this study, our objective was to develop a dataset and NLP methods to detect and categorize self-acknowledged limitations (e.g., sample size, blinding) reported in randomized controlled trial (RCT) publications. METHODS: We created a data model of limitation types in RCT studies and annotated a corpus of 200 full-text RCT publications using this data model. We fine-tuned BERT-based sentence classification models to recognize the limitation sentences and their types. To address the small size of the annotated corpus, we experimented with data augmentation approaches, including Easy Data Augmentation (EDA) and Prompt-Based Data Augmentation (PromDA). We applied the best-performing model to a set of about 12K RCT publications to characterize self-acknowledged limitations at larger scale. RESULTS: score of 0.7, improving upon the vanilla PubMedBERT model by 2.7 percentage points, with statistical significance (p<.001). CONCLUSION: The model could support automated screening tools which can be used by journals to draw the authors' attention to reporting issues. Automatic extraction of limitations from RCT publications could benefit peer review and evidence synthesis, and support advanced methods to search and aggregate the evidence from the clinical trial literature.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
2021 · 90.765 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 83.089 Zit.
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
1977 · 78.048 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 63.587 Zit.
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
2003 · 62.236 Zit.