Back to Cookbook
KiloClaw

Systematic Review Dedup & Screening Pipeline

De-duplicate, screen, and log decisions without losing your mind

A librarian-friendly, researcher-friendly pipeline for evidence synthesis. Import citations from multiple databases, de-duplicate, set screening rules, track decisions, and output counts plus audit logs for transparency and reproducibility.

House RecipeWork10 min

INGREDIENTS

📄Google Docs

PROMPT

Create a skill called "Systematic Review Dedup & Screening Pipeline". Intake questions: - Review question (PICO or equivalent; if not applicable: unspecified) - Databases searched and export formats available (RIS/BibTeX/CSV) - Screening criteria (inclusion/exclusion) - Screening mode: single or dual; who the screeners are (if unspecified, ask once then proceed) Workflow: 1) Validate imports (detect empty fields, encoding issues). 2) De-duplicate: - Exact matches - Probable matches flagged for human review - Produce a dedup log 3) Screening setup: - Build a screening form aligned to criteria - Build a reason-for-exclusion controlled vocabulary 4) Output: - Included list + excluded list + log - Counts summary suitable for methods reporting Rules: - Never delete anything without producing a log of what changed. - If a detail is unknown, write "unspecified" and continue.

How It Works

Systematic reviews pull from multiple databases, producing duplicates and a heavy

screening burden. Reference managers only partially de-duplicate, leaving a

time-consuming manual tail. This recipe creates a structured pipeline with a

full audit trail.

What You Get

  • Import validation (RIS/BibTeX/CSV) with encoding and empty-field checks
  • De-duplication pass: exact matches auto-merged, ambiguous pairs flagged for review
  • Screening form aligned to your inclusion/exclusion criteria
  • Reason-for-exclusion controlled vocabulary
  • Conflict resolution workflow (two-screener mode if applicable)
  • Final outputs: included list, excluded list, decision log, and PRISMA-style counts

Setup Steps

  1. Provide your citation exports and the databases searched
  2. Provide your review question and screening criteria (or ask for help drafting them)
  3. Choose screening mode: single, dual-blind, or team
  4. The Claw produces a dedup decision list, screening sheets, and final exports with logs

Tips

  • Never delete anything without a log — this recipe enforces that
  • The ambiguous-pair review step catches what automated dedup misses
  • Export the decision log for your methods section
Tags:#academics#librarians#systematic-review#data-management#reproducibility