Abstract
ABSTRACT Objectives Artificial intelligence-powered tools, such as ASReview, could reduce the burden of title and abstract screening. This study aimed to assess the accuracy and efficiency of using ASReview in a health economic context. Methods A sample from a previous systematic literature review containing 4,994 articles was used. Previous manual screening resulted in 134 articles included for full-text screening (FT) and 50 for data extraction (DE). Here, accuracy and efficiency was evaluated by comparing the number of identified relevant articles with ASReview versus manual screening. Pre-defined stopping rules using sampling criteria and heuristic criteria were tested. Robustness of the AI-tool’s performance was determined using 1,000 simulations. Results Considering included stopping rules, median accuracy for FT articles remained below 85%, but reached 100% for DE articles. To identify all relevant articles, a median of 89.9% of FT articles needed to be screened, compared to 7.7% for DE articles. Potential time savings between 49 and 59 hours could be achieved, depending on the stopping rule. Conclusions In our case study, all DE articles were identified after screening 7.7% of the sample, allowing for substantial time savings. ASReview likely has the potential to substantially reduce screening time in systematic reviews of health economic articles.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call