Identifying and removing duplicate records from systematic review searches.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kwon Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4613377 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Identifying and removing duplicate records from systematic review searches.
Kwon Yoojin Y Lemieux Michelle M McTavish Jill J Wathen Nadine N
Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA 20151001 4
<h4>Objective</h4>The purpose of this study was to compare effectiveness of different options for de-duplicating records retrieved from systematic review searches.<h4>Methods</h4>Using the records from a published systematic review, five de-duplication options were compared. The time taken to de-duplicate in each option and the number of false positives (were deleted but should not have been) and false negatives (should have been deleted but were not) were recorded.<h4>Results</h4>The time for e ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) platforms provide a major approach to obtaining millions of short reads from samples. NGS has been used in a wide range of analyses, such as for determining genome sequences, analyzing evolutionary processes, identifying gene expression and resolving metagenomic analyses. Usually, the quality of NGS data impacts the final study conclusions. Moreover, quality assessment is generally considered the first step in data analyses to ensure the use of only reliable reads for further studies. In NGS platforms, the presence of duplicated reads (redundancy) that are usually introduced during library sequencing is a major issue. These might have a serious impact on research application, as redundancies in reads can lead to difficulties in subsequent analysis (e.g., de novo genome assembly). Herein, we present NGSReadsTreatment, a computational tool for the removal of duplicated reads in paired-end or single-end datasets. NGSReadsTreatment can handle reads from any platform with the same or different sequence lengths. Using the probabilistic structure Cuckoo Filter, the redundant reads are identified and removed by comparing the reads with themselves. Thus, no prerequisite is required beyond the set of reads. NGSReadsTreatment was compared with other redundancy removal tools in analyzing different sets of reads. The results demonstrated that NGSReadsTreatment was better than the other tools in both the amount of redundancies removed and the use of computational memory for all analyses performed. Available in https://sourceforge.net/projects/ngsreadstreatment/ .
| S-EPMC6690869 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The usefulness of Google Scholar (GS) as a bibliographic database for biomedical systematic review (SR) searching is a subject of current interest and debate in research circles. Recent research has suggested GS might even be used alone in SR searching. This assertion is challenged here by testing whether GS can locate all studies included in 21 previously published SRs. Second, it examines the recall of GS, taking into account the maximum number of items that can be viewed, and tests whether more complete searches created by an information specialist will improve recall compared to the searches used in the 21 published SRs. METHODS:The authors identified 21 biomedical SRs that had used GS and PubMed as information sources and reported their use of identical, reproducible search strategies in both databases. These search strategies were rerun in GS and PubMed, and analyzed as to their coverage and recall. Efforts were made to improve searches that underperformed in each database. RESULTS:GS' overall coverage was higher than PubMed (98% versus 91%) and overall recall is higher in GS: 80% of the references included in the 21 SRs were returned by the original searches in GS versus 68% in PubMed. Only 72% of the included references could be used as they were listed among the first 1,000 hits (the maximum number shown). Practical precision (the number of included references retrieved in the first 1,000, divided by 1,000) was on average 1.9%, which is only slightly lower than in other published SRs. Improving searches with the lowest recall resulted in an increase in recall from 48% to 66% in GS and, in PubMed, from 60% to 85%. CONCLUSIONS:Although its coverage and precision are acceptable, GS, because of its incomplete recall, should not be used as a single source in SR searching. A specialized, curated medical database such as PubMed provides experienced searchers with tools and functionality that help improve recall, and numerous options in order to optimize precision. Searches for SRs should be performed by experienced searchers creating searches that maximize recall for as many databases as deemed necessary by the search expert.
| S-EPMC3882110 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBlockchain technology has the potential to enable more secure, transparent, and equitable data management. In the health care domain, it has been applied most frequently to electronic health records. In addition to securely managing data, blockchain has significant advantages in distributing data access, control, and ownership to end users. Due to this attribute, among others, the use of blockchain to power personal health records (PHRs) is especially appealing.ObjectiveThis review aims to examine the current landscape, design choices, limitations, and future directions of blockchain-based PHRs.MethodsAdopting the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, a cross-disciplinary systematic review was performed in July 2020 on all eligible articles, including gray literature, from the following 8 databases: ACM, IEEE Xplore, MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Scopus, SpringerLink, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Three reviewers independently performed a full-text review and data abstraction using a standardized data collection form.ResultsA total of 58 articles met the inclusion criteria. In the review, we found that the blockchain PHR space has matured over the past 5 years, from purely conceptual ideas initially to an increasing trend of publications describing prototypes and even implementations. Although the eventual application of blockchain in PHRs is intended for the health care industry, the majority of the articles were found in engineering or computer science publications. Among the blockchain PHRs described, permissioned blockchains and off-chain storage were the most common design choices. Although 18 articles described a tethered blockchain PHR, all of them were at the conceptual stage.ConclusionsThis review revealed that although research interest in blockchain PHRs is increasing and that the space is maturing, this technology is still largely in the conceptual stage. Being the first systematic review on blockchain PHRs, this review should serve as a basis for future reviews to track the development of the space.
| S-EPMC8080150 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInformation and communication technology (ICT) has transformed the health care field worldwide. One of the main drivers of this change is the electronic health record (EHR). However, there are still open issues and challenges because the EHR usually reflects the partial view of a health care provider without the ability for patients to control or interact with their data. Furthermore, with the growth of mobile and ubiquitous computing, the number of records regarding personal health is increasing exponentially. This movement has been characterized as the Internet of Things (IoT), including the widespread development of wearable computing technology and assorted types of health-related sensors. This leads to the need for an integrated method of storing health-related data, defined as the personal health record (PHR), which could be used by health care providers and patients. This approach could combine EHRs with data gathered from sensors or other wearable computing devices. This unified view of patients' health could be shared with providers, who may not only use previous health-related records but also expand them with data resulting from their interactions. Another PHR advantage is that patients can interact with their health data, making decisions that may positively affect their health.ObjectiveThis work aimed to explore the recent literature related to PHRs by defining the taxonomy and identifying challenges and open questions. In addition, this study specifically sought to identify data types, standards, profiles, goals, methods, functions, and architecture with regard to PHRs.MethodsThe method to achieve these objectives consists of using the systematic literature review approach, which is guided by research questions using the population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and context (PICOC) criteria.ResultsAs a result, we reviewed more than 5000 scientific studies published in the last 10 years, selected the most significant approaches, and thoroughly surveyed the health care field related to PHRs. We developed an updated taxonomy and identified challenges, open questions, and current data types, related standards, main profiles, input strategies, goals, functions, and architectures of the PHR.ConclusionsAll of these results contribute to the achievement of a significant degree of coverage regarding the technology related to PHRs.
| S-EPMC5251169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:MotivationRapid development in long-read sequencing and scaffolding technologies is accelerating the production of reference-quality assemblies for large eukaryotic genomes. However, haplotype divergence in regions of high heterozygosity often results in assemblers creating two copies rather than one copy of a region, leading to breaks in contiguity and compromising downstream steps such as gene annotation. Several tools have been developed to resolve this problem. However, they either focus only on removing contained duplicate regions, also known as haplotigs, or fail to use all the relevant information and hence make errors.ResultsHere we present a novel tool, purge_dups, that uses sequence similarity and read depth to automatically identify and remove both haplotigs and heterozygous overlaps. In comparison with current tools, we demonstrate that purge_dups can reduce heterozygous duplication and increase assembly continuity while maintaining completeness of the primary assembly. Moreover, purge_dups is fully automatic and can easily be integrated into assembly pipelines.Availability and implementationThe source code is written in C and is available at https://github.com/dfguan/purge_dups.Supplementary informationSupplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
| S-EPMC7203741 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Removing duplicates might be considered as a well-resolved problem in next-generation sequencing (NGS) data processing domain. However, as NGS technology gains more recognition in clinical application, researchers start to pay more attention to its sequencing errors, and prefer to remove these errors while performing deduplication operations. Recently, a new technology called unique molecular identifier (UMI) has been developed to better identify sequencing reads derived from different DNA fragments. Most existing duplicate removing tools cannot handle the UMI-integrated data. Some modern tools can work with UMIs, but are usually slow and use too much memory. Furthermore, existing tools rarely report rich statistical results, which are very important for quality control and downstream analysis. These unmet requirements drove us to develop an ultra-fast, simple, little-weighted but powerful tool for duplicate removing and sequence error suppressing, with features of handling UMIs and reporting informative results. RESULTS:This paper presents an efficient tool gencore for duplicate removing and sequence error suppressing of NGS data. This tool clusters the mapped sequencing reads and merges reads in each cluster to generate one single consensus read. While the consensus read is generated, the random errors introduced by library construction and sequencing can be removed. This error-suppressing feature makes gencore very suitable for the application of detecting ultra-low frequency mutations from deep sequencing data. When unique molecular identifier (UMI) technology is applied, gencore can use them to identify the reads derived from same original DNA fragment. Gencore reports statistical results in both HTML and JSON formats. The HTML format report contains many interactive figures plotting statistical coverage and duplication information. The JSON format report contains all the statistical results, and is interpretable for downstream programs. CONCLUSIONS:Comparing to the conventional tools like Picard and SAMtools, gencore greatly reduces the output data's mapping mismatches, which are mostly caused by errors. Comparing to some new tools like UMI-Reducer and UMI-tools, gencore runs much faster, uses less memory, generates better consensus reads and provides simpler interfaces. To our best knowledge, gencore is the only duplicate removing tool that generates both informative HTML and JSON reports. This tool is available at: https://github.com/OpenGene/gencore.
| S-EPMC6933617 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo summarize literature describing approaches aimed at automatically identifying patients with a common phenotype.Materials and methodsWe performed a review of studies describing systems or reporting techniques developed for identifying cohorts of patients with specific phenotypes. Every full text article published in (1) Journal of American Medical Informatics Association, (2) Journal of Biomedical Informatics, (3) Proceedings of the Annual American Medical Informatics Association Symposium, and (4) Proceedings of Clinical Research Informatics Conference within the past 3 years was assessed for inclusion in the review. Only articles using automated techniques were included.ResultsNinety-seven articles met our inclusion criteria. Forty-six used natural language processing (NLP)-based techniques, 24 described rule-based systems, 41 used statistical analyses, data mining, or machine learning techniques, while 22 described hybrid systems. Nine articles described the architecture of large-scale systems developed for determining cohort eligibility of patients.DiscussionWe observe that there is a rise in the number of studies associated with cohort identification using electronic medical records. Statistical analyses or machine learning, followed by NLP techniques, are gaining popularity over the years in comparison with rule-based systems.ConclusionsThere are a variety of approaches for classifying patients into a particular phenotype. Different techniques and data sources are used, and good performance is reported on datasets at respective institutions. However, no system makes comprehensive use of electronic medical records addressing all of their known weaknesses.
| S-EPMC3932460 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe amount of time that health care clinicians (physicians and nurses) spend interacting with the electronic health record is not well understood.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the time that health care providers spend interacting with electronic health records (EHR).MethodsData are retrieved from Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, (Ovid) Embase, CINAHL, and SCOPUS.Study eligibility criteriaPeer-reviewed studies that describe the use of EHR and include measurement of time either in hours, minutes, or in the percentage of a clinician's workday. Papers were written in English and published between 1990 and 2021.ParticipantsAll physicians and nurses involved in inpatient and outpatient settings.Study appraisal and synthesis methodsA narrative synthesis of the results, providing summaries of interaction time with EHR. The studies were rated according to Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs.ResultsOut of 5,133 de-duplicated references identified through database searching, 18 met inclusion criteria. Most were time-motion studies (50%) that followed by logged-based analysis (44%). Most were conducted in the United States (94%) and examined a clinician workflow in the inpatient settings (83%). The average time was nearly 37% of time of their workday by physicians in both inpatient and outpatient settings and 22% of the workday by nurses in inpatient settings. The studies showed methodological heterogeneity.ConclusionThis systematic review evaluates the time that health care providers spend interacting with EHR. Interaction time with EHR varies depending on clinicians' roles and clinical settings, computer systems, and users' experience. The average time spent by physicians on EHR exceeded one-third of their workday. The finding is a possible indicator that the EHR has room for usability, functionality improvement, and workflow optimization.
| S-EPMC8387128 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Long-term care (LTC) facilities are an important part of the health care industry, providing care to the fastest-growing group of the population. However, the adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) in LTC facilities lags behind other areas of the health care industry. One of the reasons for the lack of widespread adoption in the United States is that LTC facilities are not eligible for incentives under the Meaningful Use program. Implementation of an EHR system in an LTC facility can potentially enhance the quality of care, provided it is appropriately implemented, used, and maintained. Unfortunately, the lag in adoption of the EHR in LTC creates a paucity of literature on the benefits of EHR implementation in LTC facilities.The objective of this systematic review was to identify the potential benefits of implementing an EHR system in LTC facilities. The study also aims to identify the common conditions and EHR features that received favorable remarks from providers and the discrepancies that needed improvement to build up momentum across LTC settings in adopting this technology.The authors conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), and MEDLINE databases. Papers were analyzed by multiple referees to filter out studies not germane to our research objective. A final sample of 28 papers was selected to be included in the systematic review.Results of this systematic review conclude that EHRs show significant improvement in the management of documentation in LTC facilities and enhanced quality outcomes. Approximately 43% (12/28) of the papers reported a mixed impact of EHRs on the management of documentation, and 33% (9/28) of papers reported positive quality outcomes using EHRs. Surprisingly, very few papers demonstrated an impact on patient satisfaction, physician satisfaction, the length of stay, and productivity using EHRs.Overall, implementation of EHRs has been found to be effective in the few LTC facilities that have implemented them. Implementation of EHRs in LTC facilities caused improved management of clinical documentation that enabled better decision making.
| S-EPMC5640822 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundAs the availability of interoperable electronic health records (iEHRs) or health information exchanges (HIEs) continues to increase, there is greater need and opportunity to assess the current evidence base on what works and what does not regarding the adoption, use, and impact of iEHRs.ObjectiveThe purpose of this project is to assess the international evidence base on the adoption, use, and impact of iEHRs.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review, searching multiple databases-MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL)-with supplemental searches conducted in Google Scholar and grey literature sources (ie, Google, Grey Literature Report, and OpenGrey). All searches were conducted in January and February 2017. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they were published in English, were published from 2006 to 2017, and were either an original research study or a literature review. In order to be included, articles needed to focus on iEHRs and HIEs across multiple health care settings, as well as on the impact and effectiveness of iEHR adoption and use.ResultsWe included 130 articles in the synthesis (113 primary studies, 86.9%; 17 reviews, 13.1%), with the majority focused on the United States (88/130, 67.7%). The primary studies focused on a wide range of health care settings; the three most prevalent settings studied included acute care (59/113, 52.2%), primary care (44/113, 38.9%), and emergency departments (34/113, 30.1%). We identified 29 distinct measurement items in the 113 primary studies that were linked to 522 specific measurement outcomes. Productivity and quality were the two evaluation dimensions that received the most attention, accounting for 14 of 29 (48%) measurement items and 306 of 522 (58.6%) measurement outcomes identified. Overall, the majority of the 522 measurement outcomes were positive (298/522, 57.1%). We also identified 17 reviews on iEHR use and impact, 6 (35%) that focused on barriers and facilitators to adoption and implementation and 11 (65%) that focused on benefits and impacts, with the more recent reviews finding little generalizable evidence of benefit and impact.ConclusionsThis review captures the status of an evolving and active field focused on the use and impact of iEHRs. While the overall findings suggest many positive impacts, the quality of the primary studies were not evaluated systematically. When broken down by specific measurement item, the results directed attention both to measurement outcomes that were consistently positive and others that were mostly negative or equivocal.
| S-EPMC6592487 | biostudies-literature