A survey on current use of software tools for systematic literature reviews

Q2 Health Professions Medical Writing Pub Date : 2023-09-22 DOI:10.56012/lxrcb5395
Veerle Persy
{"title":"A survey on current use of software tools for systematic literature reviews","authors":"Veerle Persy","doi":"10.56012/lxrcb5395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Adoption of the EU Medical Devices Regulations and In Vitro Diagnostics Regulations has led to increased demand for systematic literature reviews. This article reports on a survey investigating the current use of software platforms and tools by regulatory medical writers and others involved in conducting systematic literature reviews. The survey was completed by 125 respondents from 31 countries, evenly spread across different levels of experience. Most respondents use a partially automated (35%) or fully manual process (59%). Familiarity with specific software to conduct systematic literature reviews was low, with most respondents (61%–84%) indicating they were unfamiliar with five software applications and tools. Data extraction was named as both the most time-consuming and error-prone step in the process. Process improvement, improvement of data extraction, and time saving were seen as topics where systematic literature review software could make the most valuable contribution.","PeriodicalId":37384,"journal":{"name":"Medical Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Writing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56012/lxrcb5395","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Adoption of the EU Medical Devices Regulations and In Vitro Diagnostics Regulations has led to increased demand for systematic literature reviews. This article reports on a survey investigating the current use of software platforms and tools by regulatory medical writers and others involved in conducting systematic literature reviews. The survey was completed by 125 respondents from 31 countries, evenly spread across different levels of experience. Most respondents use a partially automated (35%) or fully manual process (59%). Familiarity with specific software to conduct systematic literature reviews was low, with most respondents (61%–84%) indicating they were unfamiliar with five software applications and tools. Data extraction was named as both the most time-consuming and error-prone step in the process. Process improvement, improvement of data extraction, and time saving were seen as topics where systematic literature review software could make the most valuable contribution.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对当前使用软件工具进行系统文献综述的调查
欧盟医疗器械法规和体外诊断法规的采用导致对系统文献综述的需求增加。本文报告了一项调查,调查了监管医学作家和其他参与进行系统文献综述的人目前对软件平台和工具的使用情况。该调查由来自31个国家的125名受访者完成,他们平均分布在不同的经验水平上。大多数受访者使用部分自动化(35%)或完全手动(59%)的流程。对进行系统文献综述的特定软件的熟悉程度很低,大多数受访者(61%-84%)表示他们不熟悉五种软件应用程序和工具。数据提取被认为是该过程中最耗时和最容易出错的步骤。过程改进、数据提取的改进和节省时间被视为系统文献回顾软件可以做出最有价值贡献的主题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Writing
Medical Writing Health Professions-Medical Terminology
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Medical Writing is a quarterly publication that aims to educate and inform medical writers in Europe and beyond. Each issue focuses on a specific theme, and all issues include feature articles and regular columns on topics relevant to the practice of medical writing. We welcome articles providing practical advice to medical writers; guidelines and reviews/summaries/updates of guidelines published elsewhere; original research; opinion pieces; interviews; and review articles.
期刊最新文献
I did it so you don’t have to: Lessons learned as a young writer struggling with a regulatory document Overcoming confidential information challenges faced by study sponsors today Meet and Share session on protecting the public from undue harm during research studies: A report Medical Writing explores the many faces of biotechnology Harold Swanberg, MD: Why and how EMWA should remember him
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1