A project home that reports itself
The daily home base for any active systematic review. Live PRISMA 2020 flow, 8-stage workflow tracker, AI Screening summary, role-assigned team tab, in-context team chat, and immutable activity feed — all on one page. Every team member knows where the project stands without asking.
Updated April 2026
Project
Live PRISMA Flow & Progress
Intravascular Ultrasound–Guided vs Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
- Research Criteria
- Literature Search
- Screening
- Risk of Bias
- Data Extraction
- Meta-Analysis
- GRADE Assessment
- Manuscript
- SPSarah completed data extraction (12 studies)2h ago
Marcus flagged Bendary 2024 for arbitration2h ago
- SPSarah completed risk of bias assessment for IVUS-ACS 20242h ago
Priya ran leave-one-out sensitivity analysis3h ago
- SPSarah J. ParkPrincipal Investigator
Aisha N. PatelReviewer
David K. ThompsonReviewer
Liam O'ConnorObserver
- Marcus E. Chen2h ago
Just finished my full-text screening pass on Bendary 2024. Flagging it for arbitration — the IVUS protocol is non-standard (no MSA cutoff specified) and follow-up is shorter than our 12-month threshold.
- SPSarah2h ago
Agreed, that one's borderline. I'll exclude it and document under "protocol non-standard". Updating the PRISMA flow now.
- Aisha N. Patel1h ago
FYI on heterogeneity for MACE composite — I² is 71% which is high. We may need to subgroup by lesion complexity (LM/CTO/bifurcation vs all-comers) before locking the random-effects model.
Key Capabilities
8-Stage Workflow Tracker
A vertical tracker showing live status for every workflow step: PICOS / Research Criteria, Literature Search, Screening, Risk of Bias, Data Extraction, Meta-Analysis, GRADE Assessment, Manuscript. Each stage shows complete, in-progress, split (dual-reviewer), or pending. Stage-level permissions per role. The team always knows where the project is without asking.
Live PRISMA 2020 Flow
The PRISMA 2020 flow updates in real time as records identify, deduplicate, screen, and include. Inline expand reveals detailed counts: records identified from databases, duplicates removed, screened, Non-RCT pre-filter exclusions, reports sought, reports excluded, studies included in synthesis. Exports straight into the manuscript supplementary file.
AI Screening Summary
The Classification Engine's confidence-tiered output surfaces directly on the project home: Include / Uncertain / Exclude counts, average confidence, and low-confidence (<70%) records flagged for human attention first. Saves cohort programs from sifting through bulk inclusions to find the borderline judgement calls.
Team Tab with 5-Role Assignment
Per-project role assignment from the canonical 5-role hierarchy: Principal Investigator (full project + team control), Lead Reviewer (assigns tasks, resolves conflicts), Reviewer (screens, extracts, assesses), Methodologist (RoB, meta-analysis, GRADE focus), Observer (read-only — supervisors, funders, external auditors). A user can be PI on one project and Reviewer on another.
In-Context Team Chat
Per-project chat thread surfaces inline on the project home. Threaded replies, @mentions, and file sharing keep discussion attached to the project rather than scattered across email. Methodology decisions ('flagging Bendary 2024 for arbitration', 'I² is 71% — let's subgroup before locking the model') stay in the audit trail.
Immutable Activity Feed
Every action — screening decision, conflict resolution, data modification, AI suggestion (and acceptance/override), role change, export event — logs with user, timestamp, and rationale. Entries cannot be edited or deleted. The full feed exports as part of the project's supplementary materials, exactly the documentation Cochrane and journal peer review now require.
Frequently asked questions
- What is the Project Command Center?
- It's the per-project home base. One page combining the 8-stage workflow tracker, live PRISMA 2020 flow, AI Screening summary, role-assigned Team tab, in-context team chat, and an immutable activity feed. Visiting the project URL = full project status without clicking through tabs.
- How does it compare to Covidence's per-project view?
- Covidence's per-project view is mature for screening and extraction (the 2 of 8 steps it covers). mapped's Command Center covers all 8 workflow steps in one view, plus the role assignment matrix, in-context chat, and immutable activity feed. If your team has rotating supervisors or accreditation review obligations, the audit-trail surface alone is the differentiator.
- Does mapped enforce role-based permissions?
- Yes — at the stage level. A Reviewer can complete screening but cannot delete a project. An Observer is read-only across the entire project. A Methodologist can configure meta-analysis settings but cannot reassign roles. Permissions are enforced platform-wide; the system won't let you accidentally skip dual review or delete an audit-trail entry.
- Who uses the Command Center?
- Anyone running an active systematic review. Solo researchers see the same view as 7-person cohort teams — the layout scales, the role assignments adjust. Particularly valuable for cohort programs where multiple supervisors rotate across projects and need a fast 'where are we' view; for institutional teams whose accreditation reviewers will ask 'who decided what, when'; and for reviews that will face Cochrane Editorial Unit or top-tier journal peer review.
- How much does the Command Center cost?
- Included in every paid plan. The free tier shows the Command Center on your one active project; the Mapped Project tier (list $119/project, currently $79 launch pricing) unlocks unlimited collaborators and the full team chat / role assignment surface; the Mapped Team tier adds higher per-project limits; Custom Enterprise plans add SSO and tenant-wide audit exports. See mappedresearch.com/pricing.
- Is the activity feed exportable for audit?
- Yes — the full feed exports as a timestamped, user-attributed CSV or PDF for inclusion in your manuscript's supplementary materials. Required for PRISMA 2020 compliance documentation, useful for Cochrane Editorial Unit submissions, and increasingly expected by IRB and accreditation reviews. Nothing in the feed can be edited or deleted by any role; it's append-only by design.
Comparing tools? See how mapped stacks up against Covidence on the workflow you actually run.
Mapped vs Covidence