Develop, Test, and Disseminate a New Technology to Modernize Data Abstraction in Systematic Reviews [Methods Study], United States, 2013-2019

Systematic reviews combine the results of many studies. In health research, these reviews can help determine which treatments or types of care work best. As part of a systematic review, researchers find and record important study information, such as design and results, from published journal articles. This process, called abstraction, takes time. If researchers make errors during this process, the systematic review may come to incorrect conclusions, which can affect healthcare decisions. Researchers abstract information in different ways. In single abstraction and verification, one person abstracts information and a second person reviews it for accuracy. In dual abstraction, two people abstract information on their own and compare the results.
In this study, the research team created and tested a new software program to help with abstraction. In the new software, researchers place flags within a journal article, displayed next to a data collection form on a computer screen, to easily find abstracted information. The team compared three approaches for abstracting information:

Single abstraction and verification with the new software
Single abstraction and verification without the new software
Dual abstraction without the new software

The research team looked at how accurate the abstractions were and how much time it took to do them.
To access the software and methods, please visit the DAA Bitbucket.