Sensitivity and specificity of alternative screening methods for systematic reviews using text mining tools.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of text mining (TM) on the sensitivity and specificity of title and abstract screening strategies for systematic reviews (SRs). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Twenty reviewers each evaluated a 500-citation set. We compared five screening methods: conventional double screen (CDS), single screen, double screen with TM, combined double screen and single screen with TM, and single screen with TM. Rayyan, Abstrackr, and SWIFT-Review were used for each TM method. The results of a published SR were used as the reference standard. RESULTS: The mean sensitivity and specificity achieved by CDS were 97.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 94.7, 99.3) and 95.0% (95% CI: 93.0, 97.1). When compared with single screen, CDS provided a greater sensitivity without a decrease in specificity. Rayyan, Abstrackr, and SWIFT-Review identified all relevant studies. Specificity was often higher for TM-assisted methods than that for CDS, although with mean differences of only one-to-two percentage points. For every 500 citations not requiring manual screening, 216 minutes (95% CI: 169, 264) could be saved. CONCLUSION: TM-assisted screening methods resulted in similar sensitivity and modestly improved specificity as compared to CDS. The time saved with TM makes this a promising new tool for SR.

Alterations in the Experience of Time, Space, and Intersubjectivity and the Interaction with Pre-Existent Psychopathology during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and the measures to protect the physically vulnerable may disproportionately affect people with mental health vulnerabilities, who receive psychotherapeutic inpatient treatment, as many of these measures impact the (inter)subjective space crucial to psychotherapy. OBJECTIVE: We investigate how people with pre-existing mental health conditions and healthcare professionals experienced changes linked to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: During the first COVID-19 outbreak and lockdown in spring 2020, we conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and healthcare professionals at a clinic for psychosomatic medicine in Germany and analyzed them following the principles of descriptive phenomenology focusing on social interactions, intersubjectivity, and the therapeutic space. RESULTS: We conducted a total of >30 h of interviews with 19 patients and 17 healthcare professionals. Analyses revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic and the related measures have led to a sudden loss of a sense of normality. Participants experienced changes in the perception of time, space, self, and embodied interaction with others, resulting in a profound feeling of alienation and "unhomeliness" which seemed to magnify pre-existing psychopathology. The inpatient psychotherapeutic environment provided safety by offering spatial and temporal structures and opportunities for social interaction, supporting people to find new ways to be in a changed world. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that despite the threat of infection, it is vital to continue to provide people with psychological vulnerabilities with a safe therapeutic space in which to regain a sense of safety in a changed world. This is particularly important, as those people seem to suffer intensely from the collateral measures of a pandemic.