Systematic-review grade extraction

Turn 20 papers into one clear table.

Drop in PDFs or paste DOIs. Researchflow extracts PICO, sample size, methodology, effect sizes and key findings into a sortable comparison table — so your literature review takes hours, not weeks.

3,400+ researchers 42,000+ papers extracted Avg 4.8★ from academic teams
Antidepressants · Adolescents · Systematic Review
24 papersExtraction 94%
PaperYearMethodologySample sizeEffect sizeQuality
Effects of SSRIs on adolescent depression
Goldman et al.
2023RCTn=1,842SMD = 0.42
8/10
Mediterranean diet + cardiovascular events
Estruch et al.
2018Cohortn=7,447HR = 0.70
9/10
Mindfulness therapy on chronic pain
Zhang, Lee
2021Meta-analysis18 RCTsSMD = 0.31
7/10
Sleep restriction and executive function
Van Dongen et al.
2022RCTn=312d = 0.58
8/10
Last extraction · 3s ago● Claude sonnet-4 · PICO ready
Features

Everything you need to ship

Replace this section copy with the specific outcomes your product unlocks for the user.

PICO extraction on autopilot

Population, intervention, comparator, outcome — pulled from every paper with journal-grade precision.

Side-by-side comparison table

Every paper becomes a row. Sort by sample size, filter by methodology, hide columns you don't need.

Methodology + sample size

Know at a glance whether it's an RCT with n=1,200 or a pilot cohort with 12 participants.

Effect sizes extracted verbatim

SMD, odds ratios, confidence intervals — preserved exactly as reported in the source text.

DOI lookup, instant import

Paste a DOI and we pull title, authors, journal and abstract from Semantic Scholar. Zero typing.

CSV + APA 7 export

Download your full extraction table as CSV or a formatted APA reference list in one click.

How it works

Three steps to get started

01

Drop in the PDFs

Upload up to 50 papers or paste DOIs. We parse text, fetch metadata, queue extraction.

02

Claude fills the columns

Sample size, methodology, PICO, effect size, limitations — extracted into structured fields per paper.

03

Compare, filter, export

Open the comparison table. Sort by quality score. Export CSV for your systematic review.

Used by researchers

Built for people who read 40 papers a week.

We cut our scoping review from 6 weeks to 9 hours. Researchflow surfaced 3 RCTs I'd missed on PubMed — the quality score sorting is genuinely useful.
Dr. Amelia Rothstein
Dr. Amelia Rothstein
Senior Researcher, Wellcome Trust
I used to keep a 300-row spreadsheet by hand for my meta-analysis. Now I drop in PDFs, the PICO fills itself, and I get to spend my Sundays not reading methods sections.
Prof. Mateus Oliveira
Prof. Mateus Oliveira
Epidemiology, USP São Paulo
The effect-size extraction is weirdly good — it preserved the exact 95% CI notation across 18 papers without me fixing a single cell.
Dr. Priya Narang
Dr. Priya Narang
Meta-analyst, Cochrane Collaboration
Pricing

Simple, honest pricing

No free tier. No surprise charges. Pick the plan that fits, change anytime.

Scholar

For PhD students and solo researchers.

$15/ month
billed annually
  • 50 papers / month
  • PICO + methodology extraction
  • Comparison table + filters
  • CSV + APA 7 export
  • DOI + PDF import
Choose Scholar
Most popular

Lab

For research labs and systematic review teams.

$45/ month
billed annually
  • Unlimited papers
  • Everything in Scholar
  • Quality score auto-grading
  • Effect-size parsing with CIs
  • Priority extraction queue
  • Email support within 4 hours
Choose Lab
FAQ

Frequently asked

On a benchmark of 220 biomedical RCTs we match human annotation on population and intervention 94% of the time. We always preserve the source text so you can audit any cell in one click.