Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Apr 23;4(2):e12234.
doi: 10.1002/jcv2.12234. eCollection 2024 Jun.

How to optimize the systematic review process using AI tools

Nicholas Fabiano  1 , Arnav Gupta  2   3 , Nishaant Bhambra  4 , Brandon Luu  5 , Stanley Wong  6 , Muhammad Maaz  7   8 , Jess G Fiedorowicz  1   9   10   11 , Andrew L Smith  1   9 , Marco Solmi  1   9   10   11   12
Affiliations
Review

How to optimize the systematic review process using AI tools

Nicholas Fabiano et al. JCPP Adv. .

Abstract

Systematic reviews are a cornerstone for synthesizing the available evidence on a given topic. They simultaneously allow for gaps in the literature to be identified and provide direction for future research. However, due to the ever-increasing volume and complexity of the available literature, traditional methods for conducting systematic reviews are less efficient and more time-consuming. Numerous artificial intelligence (AI) tools are being released with the potential to optimize efficiency in academic writing and assist with various stages of the systematic review process including developing and refining search strategies, screening titles and abstracts for inclusion or exclusion criteria, extracting essential data from studies and summarizing findings. Therefore, in this article we provide an overview of the currently available tools and how they can be incorporated into the systematic review process to improve efficiency and quality of research synthesis. We emphasize that authors must report all AI tools that have been used at each stage to ensure replicability as part of reporting in methods.

Keywords: ChatGPT; artificial intelligence; evidence synthesis; large‐language models; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

MM developed xtrct.app which was cited in this paper. MS received honoraria/has been a consultant for Abbvie, Angelini, Lundbeck, Otsuka, unrelated to this work.

References

    1. Allot, A. , Lee, K. , Chen, Q. , Luo, L. , & Lu, Z. (2021). LitSuggest: A web‐based system for literature recommendation and curation using machine learning. Nucleic Acids Research, 49(W1), W352–W358. 10.1093/nar/gkab326 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bellato, A. , Admani, M. A. , Deak, C. , Farhat, L. C. , Fontana Antunes de Oliveira, M. C. , Vasconcelos, R. , Malanchini, M. , Shephard, E. , & Michelini, G. (2023a). Autonomic dysregulation and self‐injurious thoughts and behaviours in children and young people: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. JCPP Advances, 3(3), e12148. 10.1002/jcv2.12148 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bellato, A. , Cristea, I. A. , Giovane, C. D. , Fazel, S. , Polanczyk, G. V. , Solmi, M. , & Larsson, H. (2023b). Evidence‐based child and adolescent mental health care: The role of high‐quality and transparently reported evidence synthesis studies. JCPP Advances, 3(3), e12197. 10.1002/jcv2.12197 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Blaizot, A. , Veettil, S. K. , Saidoung, P. , Moreno‐Garcia, C. F. , Wiratunga, N. , Aceves‐Martins, M. , Lai, N. M. , & Chaiyakunapruk, N. (2022). Using artificial intelligence methods for systematic review in health sciences: A systematic review. Research Synthesis Methods, 13(3), 353–362. 10.1002/jrsm.1553 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Borah, R. , Brown, A. W. , Capers, P. L. , & Kaiser, K. A. (2017). Analysis of the time and workers needed to conduct systematic reviews of medical interventions using data from the PROSPERO registry. BMJ Open, 7(2), e012545. 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012545 - DOI - PMC - PubMed