Usability and acceptability of four systematic review automation software packages: A mixed method design

Gina Cleo*, Anna Mae Scott, Farhana Islam, Blair Julien, Elaine Beller

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

45 Citations (Scopus)
230 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Aim: New software packages help to improve the efficiency of conducting a systematic review through automation of key steps in the systematic review. The aim of this study was to gather qualitative data on the usability and acceptability of four systematic review automation software packages (Covidence, SRA-Helper for EndNote, Rayyan and RobotAnalyst) for the citation screening step of a systematic review. Methods: We recruited three volunteer systematic reviewers and asked them to use allocated software packages during citation screening. They then completed a 12-item online questionnaire which was tailored to capture data for the software packages used. Findings: All four software packages were reported to be easy or very easy to learn and use. SRA-Helper for EndNote was most favoured by participants for screening citations and Covidence for resolving conflicts. Overall, participants reported that SRA-Helper for EndNote would be their software package of choice, primarily due to its efficiency. Conclusion: This study identified a number of considerations which systematic reviewers can use as a basis of their decision which software to use when performing the citation screening and dispute resolution steps of a systematic review.

Original languageEnglish
Article number145
JournalSystematic Reviews
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 20 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Usability and acceptability of four systematic review automation software packages: A mixed method design'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this