Strategizing AI utilization for psychological literature screening: A comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms and key factors to consider.

IF 8 2区 生物学 Q1 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2026-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-12-19 DOI:10.1017/rsm.2025.10053
Lars König, Steffen Zitzmann, Martin Hecht
{"title":"Strategizing AI utilization for psychological literature screening: A comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms and key factors to consider.","authors":"Lars König, Steffen Zitzmann, Martin Hecht","doi":"10.1017/rsm.2025.10053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With the rapid growth of scholarly literature, efficient artificial intelligence (AI)-aided abstract screening tools are becoming increasingly important. This study evaluated 10 different machine learning (ML) algorithms used in AI-aided screening tools for ordering abstracts according to their estimated relevance. We focused on assessing their performance in terms of the number of abstracts required to screen to achieve a sufficient detection rate of relevant articles. Our evaluation included articles screened with diverse inclusion and exclusion criteria. Crucially, we examined how characteristics of the screening data-such as the proportion of relevant articles, the overall frequency of abstracts, and the amount of training data-impacted algorithm effectiveness. Our findings provide valuable insights for researchers across disciplines, highlighting key factors to consider when selecting an ML algorithm and determining a stopping point for AI-aided screening. Specifically, we observed that the algorithm combining the logistic regression (LR) classifier with the sentence-bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (SBERT) feature extractor outperformed other algorithms, demonstrating both the highest efficiency and the lowest variability in performance. Nonetheless, the algorithm's performance varied across experimental conditions. Building on these findings, we discuss the results and provide practical recommendations to assist users in the AI-aided screening process.</p>","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":"17 3","pages":"451-482"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13126213/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Synthesis Methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2025.10053","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With the rapid growth of scholarly literature, efficient artificial intelligence (AI)-aided abstract screening tools are becoming increasingly important. This study evaluated 10 different machine learning (ML) algorithms used in AI-aided screening tools for ordering abstracts according to their estimated relevance. We focused on assessing their performance in terms of the number of abstracts required to screen to achieve a sufficient detection rate of relevant articles. Our evaluation included articles screened with diverse inclusion and exclusion criteria. Crucially, we examined how characteristics of the screening data-such as the proportion of relevant articles, the overall frequency of abstracts, and the amount of training data-impacted algorithm effectiveness. Our findings provide valuable insights for researchers across disciplines, highlighting key factors to consider when selecting an ML algorithm and determining a stopping point for AI-aided screening. Specifically, we observed that the algorithm combining the logistic regression (LR) classifier with the sentence-bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (SBERT) feature extractor outperformed other algorithms, demonstrating both the highest efficiency and the lowest variability in performance. Nonetheless, the algorithm's performance varied across experimental conditions. Building on these findings, we discuss the results and provide practical recommendations to assist users in the AI-aided screening process.

心理学文献筛选中的人工智能利用策略:机器学习算法和关键考虑因素的比较分析。
随着学术文献的快速增长,高效的人工智能辅助摘要筛选工具变得越来越重要。本研究评估了人工智能辅助筛选工具中使用的10种不同的机器学习(ML)算法,根据其估计的相关性对摘要进行排序。我们的重点是评估他们的表现,根据需要筛选的摘要数量来达到足够的相关文章的检测率。我们的评价纳入了采用不同纳入和排除标准筛选的文章。至关重要的是,我们研究了筛选数据的特征(如相关文章的比例、摘要的总体频率和训练数据的数量)如何影响算法的有效性。我们的研究结果为跨学科的研究人员提供了有价值的见解,强调了在选择机器学习算法和确定人工智能辅助筛选的停止点时需要考虑的关键因素。具体来说,我们观察到将逻辑回归(LR)分类器与来自变压器的句子双向编码器表示(SBERT)特征提取器相结合的算法优于其他算法,表现出最高的效率和最低的性能变化。尽管如此,该算法的性能在不同的实验条件下有所不同。在这些发现的基础上,我们讨论了结果,并提供了实用的建议,以帮助用户进行人工智能辅助筛查过程。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Research Synthesis Methods
Research Synthesis Methods MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGYMULTID-MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
CiteScore
16.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Research Synthesis Methods is a reputable, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the development and dissemination of methods for conducting systematic research synthesis. Our aim is to advance the knowledge and application of research synthesis methods across various disciplines. Our journal provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and knowledge related to designing, conducting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and applying research synthesis. While research synthesis is commonly practiced in the health and social sciences, our journal also welcomes contributions from other fields to enrich the methodologies employed in research synthesis across scientific disciplines. By bridging different disciplines, we aim to foster collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of research synthesis methods. Whether you are a researcher, practitioner, or stakeholder involved in research synthesis, our journal strives to offer valuable insights and practical guidance for your work.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书