Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Blind Procedures02:07

Blind Procedures

10.6K
Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which...
10.6K
Case Studies01:22

Case Studies

11.7K
There are many research methods available to psychologists in their efforts to understand, describe, and explain behavior and the cognitive and biological processes that underlie it.
11.7K
Blinding01:11

Blinding

2.5K
Blinding is a commonly used method of not telling participants which treatment a subject is receiving. Blinding is a critical part of a randomized control trial or RCT. It reduces the bias that affects the results. In an RCT, blinding is used in the form of a placebo. A placebo effect occurs when untreated subjects falsely believe they have received the treatment and report improved symptoms. A placebo or a dummy treatment is administered to subjects to negate the bias caused by such an effect.
2.5K
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

133
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
133
Observational Studies01:11

Observational Studies

8.7K
Observational studies are a type of analytical study where researchers observe events without any interventions. In other words, the researcher does not influence the response variable or the experiment's outcome.
There are three types of observational studies – Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional.
Prospective Study
Prospective studies, also known as longitudinal or cohort studies, are carried out by collecting future data from groups sharing similar characteristics. One...
8.7K
Group Design02:01

Group Design

8.9K
The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between...
8.9K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Ambient AI in primary care: an exploratory mixed methods survey of UK general practitioners.

BMJ health & care informatics·2026
Same author

Heat risk communication for older adults living in the community: A scoping review.

The journal of climate change and health·2026
Same author

Flexible and scalable federated learning with deep feature prompts for digital pathology.

NPJ digital medicine·2026
Same author

Behavioural nudges to reduce low-value care for low back pain in the emergency department (NUDG-ED): a 2 × 2 factorial, pragmatic cluster randomized trial.

CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne·2026
Same author

AI Scribes: Are We Measuring What Matters?

JMIR medical informatics·2026
Same author

Adverse effects and discontinuation rates for darifenacin in overactive urinary bladder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 12, 2025

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
08:36

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

574

The 2-week systematic review (2weekSR) method was successfully blind-replicated by another team: a case study.

Catalin Tufanaru1, Didi Surian1, Anna Mae Scott2

  • 1Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Level 6, Macquarie University, 75 Talavera Road, North Ryde, New South Wales 2109, Australia.

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
|October 25, 2023
PubMed
Summary

Replicating a 2-week systematic review (2weekSR) with automation tools showed high fidelity in methods but challenges in outcomes due to reporting gaps. Enhanced reporting is key for systematic review replicability.

Keywords:
2-Week systematic reviewAutomation toolBarriersFacilitatorsReplication fidelityReplication study

More Related Videos

Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Shugan Jieyu Capsules for the Treatment of Insomnia
04:34

Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Shugan Jieyu Capsules for the Treatment of Insomnia

Published on: February 17, 2023

1.1K
Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies
10:38

Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies

Published on: January 16, 2019

20.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 12, 2025

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
08:36

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

574
Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Shugan Jieyu Capsules for the Treatment of Insomnia
04:34

Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Shugan Jieyu Capsules for the Treatment of Insomnia

Published on: February 17, 2023

1.1K
Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies
10:38

Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies

Published on: January 16, 2019

20.2K

Area of Science:

  • Medical Informatics
  • Evidence Synthesis
  • Research Methodology

Background:

  • Systematic reviews (SRs) are crucial for evidence synthesis.
  • Automation tools can expedite SR creation, but their replicability needs assessment.
  • The fidelity method is a robust approach to evaluate research reproducibility.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the replicability of a 2-week systematic review (2weekSR) developed with automation tools.
  • To evaluate the fidelity of the replication process for both methods and outcomes.
  • To identify barriers affecting the reproducibility of automated systematic reviews.

Main Methods:

  • Developed a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) compliant protocol for replication.
  • A three-reviewer team conducted the replication, comparing time and meta-analysis results with the original 2weekSR.
  • Calculated review process fidelity scores (FSs) for methods and outcomes, and identified replication barriers.

Main Results:

  • The replication required 63 person-hours, completed in 15 calendar days.
  • Achieved a high fidelity score (0.95) for methods, with minor partial replications.
  • Lower fidelity (0.63) for outcomes, with several tasks partially or not replicated due to missing information in the original study.

Conclusions:

  • A 2-week systematic review (2weekSR) was successfully replicated by a small team using automation tools.
  • The study highlights the need for comprehensive reporting in systematic reviews to enhance replicability.
  • Improved reporting standards can significantly boost the reliability and reproducibility of automated evidence synthesis.