FemPrompt SozArb: traceable AI-assisted qualitative literature review
The project describes AI-assisted literature identification and agent coding for a feminist AI-literacy review in social work. Human PRISM screening is separate from AI coding and source review; domain experts retain scholarly authority. The documentation discloses no bibliographic database search and deferred expert verification. Intended L2 workflow is documented; accuracy and research benefit were not evaluated here.
L2Research workflow (workflow level, not a quality rating) Source: Repository-documented Outcome: Not empirically evaluated here
Research applicability
Public pinned primary methodology documents a concrete social-work literature review using AI-assisted discovery and agent coding, human screening, source review and deferred expert authority. Recommend the bounded described process, not validated findings or comprehensive search.
Getting started
Editorial untested suggestion: begin by reading the linked pinned primary documentation, define a small non-sensitive research task and researcher checks before considering separately authorised execution.
Maintenance
Dated source snapshot only; present availability, maintenance and version parity require separate checks.
License
Source visibility is not reuse clearance; source/model/data licenses and rights require separate checking.
Workflow & human oversight
Scope: Source-described intended research use only; no execution or benefit independently verified Human control: Human reviewers screen without AI pre-assessment. Domain experts hold final scholarly authority; round-two expert verification is explicitly deferred, not a completed check. Stage connections: Humans curate references and screen in PRISM; separate agent coding/source-review stages feed synthesis and later domain-expert checks. No evidence of automatic end-to-end research planning. Stopping: Review scope and corpus boundaries are documented. Submission/publication requires scholarly approval; exact computational stopping rule not inspected. Missing evidence: No corpus, fulltexts, run artifacts or completed expert validation inspected; no independent inter-human baseline for interpreting reported divergence. README says private although metadata is public.
Workflow level is not an evidence score; higher is not better evidence.
Approach
- AI-assisted deep research and agent web search; separate agent analysis coding and source-linked assertions
Outcomes (as reported by the originating team)
Documented method or intended capability; no empirical research benefit established by this review.
Limitations
- Repository API metadata is public while README says private; no inference of corpus rights and no fulltext/dataset retrieval. - PRISMA-based reporting with an explicit no-database-search deviation is not an exhaustive systematic-search guarantee. - Source status complete and target criteria do not establish completed scholarly validation or journal acceptance. - Deterministic validation and AI source review remain distinct from deferred domain-expert verification. - AI editorial review; no human editorial verification claimed.
Reproducibility
AI editorial source review only. No candidate code, model, agent, experiment or reported outcome independently executed or reproduced.
Adoption requirements
Editorial suggestions only, untested. Check source/version, rights, data handling, model and environment prerequisites before any separately authorised adoption; this review installs or invokes nothing.
Comments
No comments yet.
Add a comment
Comments are held for moderation before appearing. Critical or corrective comments are welcome — especially evidence that an entry overstates what has been verified.