After conducting your literature search to identify studies relevant to your research question, the next step is to analyse and interpret them. This process includes:

• Selecting the studies from your search results that you will include in your review.
• Evaluating the quality of each selected study.
• Extracting and synthesising the findings (data) from all studies in an objective and unbiased manner.

Article screening enables reviewers to remove studies that are not related to the research topic.

There are two key stages in screening and selecting studies for inclusion in a review:
1. Initial Screening
In this stage, many results can be excluded by quickly assessing the title and abstract to determine their relevance to the topic.

2. Full-Text Screening
Articles that pass the initial screening are reviewed in greater detail by examining the full text. At this stage:

• Studies are selected or excluded based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
• Reasons for exclusion should be documented.

Note: If you experience difficulty accessing the full text of a particular article(s), please remember that the MTU Library can acquire material on your behalf through our inter-library loan service.

Rapid reviews often rely on a single reviewer for screening to expedite the process. In some cases, a second reviewer may assess a small portion of the results to verify validity against the selection criteria. "If time and resources allow, we recommend that dual screening of all excluded studies, at both the title and full-text stages, be used to minimize the risk of selection bias through the inappropriate exclusion of relevant studies".(King et al., 2022) Cochrane in their updated advice recommend that at least 20% of the records should be screened by two reviewers to check the level of agreement, and discuss any discrepancies.(Garritty et al., 2024a)

Note: Visit the Cornell University Library's Guide to Article Screening. This guide provides useful information on how reviewers can remove studies that are clearly not related to the research topic.

There are a number of free and subscription-based resources that are designed to assist during the Systematic Review process. Many of these tools are designed to assist with the key stages of the process, including title and abstract screening, data synthesis, and critical appraisal. Some are designed to assist the review team throughout the entire process, including protocol development, reporting of the outcomes etc.

Rayyan: Rayyan is a web-tool designed to help researchers working on systematic reviews, scoping reviews and other knowledge synthesis projects, by dramatically speeding up the process of screening and selecting studies.

Note: Rayyan offer a subscription based service and a free version for early career researchers.

Covidence: Covidence is an online software tool designed to streamline the process of conducting a systematic review (or a similarly detailed literature review such as a meta-analysis).

You can use Covidence to collaborate with a team of reviewers to screen results (at both title/abstract and full text stages), complete data extraction and work on risk of bias.

DistillerSR: DistillerSR automates the management of literature collection, screening, and assessment using AI and intelligent workflows. From a systematic literature review to a rapid review to a living review, DistillerSR simplifies the Systematic Review process and helps the review team produce transparent, audit-ready, and compliant results.

Excel - Excel is also an option for article screening.

Reference:

The Cornell University Library provides some very helpful resources for Systematic Review Team Members for carrying out a controlled approach to extracting data. The document covers such software packages such as Excel, Covidence, RevMan, SRDR, DistillerSR and many others.