Development and uptake of an online systematic review platform: the early years of the CAMARADES Systematic Review Facility (SyRF).

Q1 Medicine BMJ Open Science Pub Date : 2021-03-30 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjos-2020-100103
Zsanett Bahor, Jing Liao, Gillian Currie, Can Ayder, Malcolm Macleod, Sarah K McCann, Alexandra Bannach-Brown, Kimberley Wever, Nadia Soliman, Qianying Wang, Lee Doran-Constant, Laurie Young, Emily S Sena, Chris Sena
{"title":"Development and uptake of an online systematic review platform: the early years of the CAMARADES Systematic Review Facility (SyRF).","authors":"Zsanett Bahor, Jing Liao, Gillian Currie, Can Ayder, Malcolm Macleod, Sarah K McCann, Alexandra Bannach-Brown, Kimberley Wever, Nadia Soliman, Qianying Wang, Lee Doran-Constant, Laurie Young, Emily S Sena, Chris Sena","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2020-100103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Preclinical research is a vital step in the drug discovery pipeline and more generally in helping to better understand human disease aetiology and its management. Systematic reviews (SRs) can be powerful in summarising and appraising this evidence concerning a specific research question, to highlight areas of improvements, areas for further research and areas where evidence may be sufficient to take forward to other research domains, for instance clinical trial. Guidance and tools for preclinical research synthesis remain limited despite their clear utility. We aimed to create an online end-to-end platform primarily for conducting SRs of preclinical studies, that was flexible enough to support a wide variety of experimental designs, was adaptable to different research questions, would allow users to adopt emerging automated tools and support them during their review process using best practice. In this article, we introduce the Systematic Review Facility (https://syrf.org.uk), which was launched in 2016 and designed to support primarily preclinical SRs from small independent projects to large, crowdsourced projects. We discuss the architecture of the app and its features, including the opportunity to collaborate easily, to efficiently manage projects, to screen and annotate studies for important features (metadata), to extract outcome data into a secure database, and tailor these steps to each project. We introduce how we are working to leverage the use of automation tools and allow the integration of these services to accelerate and automate steps in the systematic review workflow.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647599/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2020-100103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Preclinical research is a vital step in the drug discovery pipeline and more generally in helping to better understand human disease aetiology and its management. Systematic reviews (SRs) can be powerful in summarising and appraising this evidence concerning a specific research question, to highlight areas of improvements, areas for further research and areas where evidence may be sufficient to take forward to other research domains, for instance clinical trial. Guidance and tools for preclinical research synthesis remain limited despite their clear utility. We aimed to create an online end-to-end platform primarily for conducting SRs of preclinical studies, that was flexible enough to support a wide variety of experimental designs, was adaptable to different research questions, would allow users to adopt emerging automated tools and support them during their review process using best practice. In this article, we introduce the Systematic Review Facility (https://syrf.org.uk), which was launched in 2016 and designed to support primarily preclinical SRs from small independent projects to large, crowdsourced projects. We discuss the architecture of the app and its features, including the opportunity to collaborate easily, to efficiently manage projects, to screen and annotate studies for important features (metadata), to extract outcome data into a secure database, and tailor these steps to each project. We introduce how we are working to leverage the use of automation tools and allow the integration of these services to accelerate and automate steps in the systematic review workflow.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
在线系统性综述平台的开发和使用:CAMARADES 系统性综述设施(SyRF)的最初几年。
临床前研究是药物发现过程中的一个重要步骤,更广泛地说,它有助于更好地了解人类疾病的病因和治疗方法。系统综述(SR)在总结和评估与特定研究问题有关的证据、强调需要改进的领域、需要进一步研究的领域以及证据可能足以推进其他研究领域(如临床试验)的领域方面非常有效。尽管临床前研究综述的指导和工具非常有用,但仍然非常有限。我们的目标是创建一个端到端的在线平台,主要用于进行临床前研究的综述,该平台足够灵活,可支持各种实验设计,适应不同的研究问题,允许用户采用新兴的自动化工具,并在综述过程中使用最佳实践为用户提供支持。在本文中,我们将介绍系统性综述工具(https://syrf.org.uk),该工具于2016年推出,旨在主要支持从小型独立项目到大型众包项目的临床前SR。我们讨论了该应用程序的架构及其功能,包括轻松协作的机会、高效管理项目、筛选和注释研究的重要特征(元数据)、将结果数据提取到安全数据库,以及根据每个项目定制这些步骤。我们将介绍如何努力利用自动化工具,并允许整合这些服务,以加快系统综述工作流程中的步骤并使其自动化。
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
BMJ Open Science
BMJ Open Science Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
31 weeks
期刊最新文献
Correction: Preclinical safety study of nacre powder in an intraosseous sheep model. Protocol for a systematic review of the validity of animal models of polydipsia with a basis in schizophrenia aetiology. Preclinical safety study of nacre powder in an intraosseous sheep model. Protocol for a systematic review of good surgical practice guidelines for experimental rodent surgery. Genome-wide DNA methylation in an animal model and human studies of schizophrenia: a protocol for a meta-analysis.
×
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