How to conduct abstract screening for systematic review – Pubrica
                     HOW TO CONDUCT  
ABSTRACT SCREENING 
FOR  SYSTEMIC REVIEW-
FROM BEGINNING TO 
END
An Academic presentation by
Dr. Nancy Agnes, Head, Technical Operations, Pubrica 
 Group: www.pubrica.com
Email: [email protected]
Today's Discussion
Outline
In-Brief  
Introductio
n
Before Screening 
Begins  During 
Abstract Screening  
After Screening Ends  
Conclusion
In-Brief
Abstract screening is an integral part of doing an efficient and thorough 
 systematic examination. The necessary first step in synthesizing the  
existing literature is abstract scanning, which helps the review team  
narrow down the vast amalgamation of citations found across  
academic libraries to the citations that should be “full text” screened  
and ultimately used in the review.
Introduction
Conducting a thorough analysis, no matter how big or
small, necessitates meticulous  preparation, 
meticulous data recording,  
and  administrative supervision. continuous
1 A high-quality analysis depends on the experience 
 of a group of material and methodological members,  
as well as information gained from previous reviews.
Identifying studies suitable for evaluating and  
screening these studies to identify others eligible for  
review is a major activity of a systematic review.
Contd...
Contd...
A high-quality systematic analysis requires searching  
for and finding a wide variety of research.
In the social sciences, systematic analysis teams face 
 difficulty in that certain study issues cross academic  
lines, necessitating multiple disciplinary and cross-  
sectional datasets to search for applicable findings.
Domain searches yielding over 5000 results are  
common in psychology, education, criminal justice,  
and medicine.
Table 1 summarises a synthesis of course  
instructions, expert discussions, and practical practice 
 undertaking or engaging in various large-evidence
systematic reviews.
Contd...

1. Create an abstract screening method for systematic Before  
review  with simple and concise queries. Screenin
It should include objects that are (a) factual, (b) “single-  g  Begins
barreled,” (c) have the same sentence structure, and (d)  
accept yes/no/unsure responses.
It is the first many recommendations forthe  
of  advancement scanning and coding forms
soyf stematic analysis thafto hrave been made over the years.
The abstract screening method is dependent on the  
study’s inclusion criterion, which should be used in an  
analysis procedure created before the literature scan.
Contd...
2. Ensure the abstract screening method is ordered logically, 
 with the simplest questions at the top.
Screening a vast number of research abstracts would be  a 
time-consuming process for review team members.
Abstract screeners naturally want to go as fast as  possible 
through the process and make assumptions on  each 
abstract.
Their pace also leads to fatigue: less fatigue means faster  
and more accurate abstract scanning; everything is  
equivalent.
Contd...
3. Conduct introductory abstract screening training in which 
 screeners are taught how to use the method and are  
given 20 to 30 abstracts to screen.
Repeat if required before the team finds an agreement.
The abstract screening tool will be circulated to
the  abstract screening team once it has been 
developed.
This team’s participants may or may not have
prior  experience screening abstracts.
Regardless of the team members’ previous encounters,  
abstract screening preparation is important.
During  
Abstract  4. On a weekly or biweekly basis, meet with the abstract 
Screening  screening team.
The abstract screening team can meet regularly or  
every other week after the initial planning and piloting  
meetings are completed, and the full team starts  
abstract screening in earnest.
These meetings aim to foster a culture of debate,  
experimentation, and excitement while also reducing  
“coder drift.”
Contd...
5. Reduce the number of modifications to the screening 
 method.
As previously said, the abstract screening tool should  be 
piloted and updated at the start of the abstract  
screening process.
Explanations to the abstract screening tool should be  
deemed necessary and beneficial as more people  
scan abstracts and work in the pilot round.
Screeners of abstracts should feel free to make  
improvements and call for clarification.
Contd...
6. Make use of a text mining abstract screening 
 programme.
Traditional abstract screening lists all citations for  screening 
using reference management software (such  as 
EndNote or Zotero) or simple spreadsheets.
After that, the abstracts are screened in the order in  which 
they were downloaded from database searches.
The first abstract screened is likely the last abstract to be  
kept for full-text screening.
Contd...
7. Each abstract must be double-screened independently.
Double-screening all available abstracts isn’t a new  
concept; it’s been recommended as best practice for  
decades.
Single screening has the power to rule out trials until  
they have been thoroughly vetted. It’s just too quick to  
make a blunder and lose a report.
8. Disagreements can be resolved in the abstract 
 screening period.
Screening disputes can arise no matter how successful 
 the screening method is or how often the abstract  
screening committee meets.
Contd...
These are often the result of mere human error; other  
times, they result from “coder drift” or other structural  
problems.
9. Encourage screeners by limiting time on task, promoting 
 intellectual buy‐in, and providing incentives.
As previously said, abstract screening is a thankless  and 
time-consuming process.
As a result, analysis supervisors, like managers in  other 
industries, must work diligently to keep abstract  
screeners motivated to continue screening on  
schedule and effectively.
After  
Screening 
10. Analyze the process and decisions after screening has  Ends
 been completed.
The abstract  scanning processculminates in a  
spreadsheet decisions foreach citation found.
Cofompleting abstract screening, particularly for massive  
proof programmes, may feel like a significant  
achievement.
Conclusion
The purpose of this paper was to include a collection of
realistic, abstract screening recommendations to  
Literature review teams and administrators of broad  
evidence evaluations.
Our instructions ensure that the abstract screening  
process is completed quickly and with the fewest possible  
mistakes.
While we agree that these recommendations should be  
made accessible to the scientific community at large and  
that their use would encourage successful research  
syntheses, further research is needed to test our  
arguments.
Contact Us
UNITED KINGDOM
+44- 7424810299
INDIA
+91-9884350006
EMAIL
[email protected]