Evidence synthesis
Reviewed
Systematic reviews with an audit trail, not a black box.
SixSentences_ turns a research question into a review workspace where retrieval, screening decisions, full texts and the final evidence base remain connected.
In plain terms
A systematic review answers a defined question through a reproducible search, explicit eligibility criteria, documented screening and a transparent synthesis of the included evidence.
Search beyond one query
Combine academic retrieval, semantic expansion, citation snowballing, web sources and known works without losing the origin of each record.
Screen with evidence
Apply eligibility criteria at title, abstract and full-text level. Decisions stay attached to records instead of disappearing into a chat transcript.
Keep the review inspectable
Protocols, exclusions, retrieval runs, reviewer notes and included studies form one project record that can be revisited and exported.
A documented workflow
From intent to inspectable output.
- 01
Define the review
State the question, criteria, time window, sources and review method before retrieval begins.
- 02
Retrieve and screen
Let the agent expand the search and assist screening while every material decision remains visible for human review.
- 03
Read and synthesise
Open full texts next to the conversation, verify passages and carry included evidence into claims, tables and the manuscript.
- 04
Export the record
Preserve the evidence base, bibliography and screening history as an auditable research output.
Method and boundaries
Method first, automation second
Automation is useful when it reduces repetitive work without hiding methodological choices. SixSentences_ separates the review setup from the agent activity so that scope, eligibility rules and retrieval bounds stay explicit.
The agent can search iteratively, inspect sources and suggest decisions. It does not turn an uncertain abstract into a silently accepted fact. Researchers can inspect the underlying record, open the source passage and change a decision.
- Protocol-aware retrieval and screening
- PRISMA, Kitchenham, Cochrane, JBI and Campbell-oriented workflows
- Known-work checks, duplicate handling and full-text acquisition
- Project-level claims linked back to evidence
From review question to manuscript
The review is not an isolated export. Included sources remain available in the library and can be linked to a manuscript project. This reduces the hand-off between search software, a reference manager, a PDF reader and the writing environment.
Human review still matters. Database coverage, copyright access, eligibility judgement and synthesis quality depend on the question and discipline. SixSentences_ is designed to make that judgement easier to audit, not to make it disappear.
Questions, answered.
- Does the AI make final inclusion decisions?
- It can assist and explain screening decisions, but the record remains reviewable and researchers retain control over inclusion, exclusion and synthesis.
- Can I use my own seed papers or database exports?
- Yes. Known works, full texts and reference exports can be added to the project so they remain part of the documented evidence base.
- Is the output automatically publication-ready?
- The workspace documents the process and prepares evidence-linked outputs. Reporting quality and compliance with a journal or review standard still require author review.
Continue through the workspace