Coiera E, Liu S. Evidence synthesis, digital scribes, and translational challenges for artificial intelligence in healthcare. Cell Reports Medicine. 2022 Dec;12. Doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2022.100860.

Summary: Healthcare has well-known challenges with safety, quality, and effectiveness, and many see artificial intelligence (AI) as essential to any solution. Emerging applications include the automated synthesis of best-practice research evidence including systematic reviews, which would ultimately see all clinical trial data published in a computational form for immediate synthesis. Digital scribes embed themselves in the

The Systemic Review Accelerator

How to complete a full Systematic Review in 2 weeks rather than 1 year  Before every great breakthrough there’s a dream or a vision. And one of the dreams of Chief Investigator Professor Paul Glasziou was to undertake systematic reviews in 2-weeks. Why, you might ask? Traditionally, systematic reviews have taken, on average, 67 weeks

Does health informatics have a replication crisis?

The Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (JAMIA) published recent work by Enrico Coiera and colleagues from Macquarie University and the University of Health Sciences (Austria) of a narrative review of literature on research replication challenges. The review concluded that the cost of poor replication is a weakening in the quality of published research

Hassanzadeh H, Nguyen A, Verspoor K. Quantifying semantic similarity of clinical evidence in the biomedical literature to facilitate related evidence synthesis. Journal of Biomedical Informatics. 2019;100:103321.

Objective: Published clinical trials and high quality peer reviewed medical publications are considered as the main sources of evidence used for synthesizing systematic reviews or practicing Evidence Based Medicine (EBM). Finding all relevant published evidence for a particular medical case is a time and labour intensive task, given the breadth of the biomedical literature. Automatic