Cardamom bun availability is arguably the most important aspect to assess here!
Karolinska? Bristol? I guess we're not meant to self-nominate 😂 Honestly though I think there's excellent people spread across so many different institutions - you might be better of finding one or two people whose work you'd like to emulate and just see if you can work with them...
Ultimately it was arbitrary for us, but the review isn't a clinical meta-analysis but an overview of methodological approaches to a specific problem... Good point about the double screening - unclear!
I've only used it informally - so for reviews going into background sections/funding applications etc. We've got a PhD student writing up a paper where we've used it though so I'll report back! I think it's probably more suited for some kinds of questions than others...
Not an ML expert so not sure! I never got beyond this cartoon level of understanding: www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-a2...systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10....
YouTube video by ASReview TV
Yes - I've used ASreview and I love it (asreview.nl). It uses ML to present you with more relevant papers earlier on, and then you only screen until a stopping role. You train the model yourself. Free! Open Source!
Thanks! Just goes to show how important a deep understanding of context is for Epi studies, doesn't it! We're slowly starting to see more use of centre and/or GP practice as IVs in pharmacoepi, the idea being that it's basically a proxy for clinician preference. Validity of that likely varies..!
This is interesting to me although I don't work in this area of epi specifically - does centre affect outcome other than through exposure in this context? I've been worried about centre adjustment in my field (RxEpi) in case it's more of an IV - as in: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
To illustrate that matching on provider may exacerbate, not remove, bias.The degree of confounding bias depends in part on the proportions of treatmen…
"The university has an obligation to interrogate the proposition that a world in which AI is widely used is desirable or inevitable. We don’t need to cheer for a vision of tomorrow in which scientists feel comfortable with not personally reading the articles …” uniavisen.dk/en/cut-the-a...
Why do we keep believing that AI will solve the climate crisis, get rid of poverty, and unleash the full potential of human creativity?