Screen with confidence
Screening is where most reviews stall. mapped pairs blinded dual-reviewer workflows with the Classification Engine for AI-accelerated batch processing — keeping the methodology rigorous while collapsing the timeline from months to weeks.
Updated April 2026
Screening
Study Selection Process
Ding, D., Zhang, J., Wu, P., Wang, Z., Shi, H., Yu, X., Wu, X., Kang, J., Hahn, J.-Y., Nam, C.-W., Doh, J.-H., Lee, B.-K., Kim, H.-Y., Huang, J., Jiang, F., Zhou, H., Chen, P., Tang, L., Jian…
Background: Coronary physiology measured by fractional flow reserve (FFR) is superior to angiography for assessing the efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Yet, the clinical adoption of post-PCI FFR is limited. Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) may represent a promising alternative, as it can quickly compute FFR from a single angiographic view. Objectives: The authors aimed to investigate the potential role of post-PCI μQFR in predicting clinical outcomes. Methods: This was a post hoc blinded analysis of the FLAVOUR trial. Patients with angiographical…
Read moreWrong comparator: compares FFR-guided vs IVUS-guided PCI; lacks an angiography-only control arm.
Key Capabilities
Two-Phase Screening
Phase 1 is title/abstract — typically 90–95% of records are excluded here. Phase 2 is full-text against detailed eligibility, with required exclusion reasons that auto-populate the PRISMA flow diagram. mapped tracks both phases independently with separate progress dashboards and IRR calculations.
Blinded Dual-Reviewer Workflow
PRISMA and Cochrane require independent dual review. mapped enforces it structurally: each reviewer sees the same records but cannot see the other's decisions until both are done. Disagreements are flagged automatically; a third reviewer or the lead resolves them with a documented rationale.
Classification Engine — Confidence-Tiered AI
The Classification Engine pre-screens records in bulk and assigns High / Medium / Low confidence tiers. High-confidence exclusions stack at the bottom of the queue; uncertain cases surface first. The AI handles obvious exclusions (wrong species, wrong design, conference abstracts) so human attention concentrates on borderline judgement calls.
Conflict Resolution
When reviewers disagree, mapped flags the record, hides both decisions, and routes it to a designated resolver (third reviewer or lead). The resolver sees both reviewers' rationales, the record itself, and a guided reconciliation interface. Every resolution is timestamped and attributed in the audit trail.
Non-RCT Pre-filter
For RCT-only reviews, mapped's Non-RCT pre-filter excludes case reports, editorials, conference abstracts, and observational designs before reviewers see them. Excluded records remain auditable; the filter is reversible per record. Typically removes 15–40% of the queue before screening even starts.
Inter-Rater Reliability + Real-Time Progress
Cohen's kappa is computed automatically per phase as decisions accumulate, so you know whether your team is agreeing meaningfully or just agreeing. Live progress dashboards show records screened, pending, and in conflict, plus per-reviewer throughput and projected completion dates.
Frequently asked questions
- What is mapped's Screening workflow?
- Two-phase PRISMA-compliant screening (title/abstract then full-text) with blinded dual-reviewer assignment, automatic conflict detection, third-reviewer resolution, Cohen's kappa IRR, and the Classification Engine for confidence-tiered AI batch pre-screening. Optional Non-RCT pre-filter excludes off-design records before reviewers see them.
- How does mapped's Screening compare to Covidence?
- Covidence is a strong, focused screening tool with a long track record. mapped covers the same dual-reviewer methodology plus seven other workflow steps in the same project — research-question validation, search, extraction, RoB, meta-analysis, GRADE, and manuscript. If you only need screening and extraction, Covidence is solid; if you want the whole pipeline in one tool, mapped wins on breadth.
- Does mapped enforce blinded dual review?
- Yes — structurally. Each reviewer sees the same records but cannot see the other's decisions until both are finished. You can't accidentally skip dual review; the system won't let you. Conflicts are flagged the moment they appear and routed to the configured resolver.
- Who is mapped's Screening for?
- Research teams running PRISMA- or Cochrane-style reviews with 1,000+ records. Solo PhD students benefit from the AI confidence tiers; teams of 3–7 benefit from blinded dual-review, conflict resolution, and the Cohen's kappa transparency that peer reviewers ask about.
- How much does Screening cost?
- The free tier includes AI-assisted screening on one active project. The Mapped Project tier (list $119/project, currently $79 launch pricing) unlocks unlimited reviewers, full Classification Engine processing, and conflict resolution. Custom Enterprise plans add unlimited projects and team members. See mappedresearch.com/pricing for current details.
- What is the Non-RCT pre-filter?
- An optional filter that excludes case reports, editorials, conference abstracts, and observational designs before reviewers see them — useful for RCT-only reviews. It's reversible per record, fully audited, and typically removes 15–40% of the screening queue. PRISMA flow numbers are populated automatically.
Comparing tools? See how mapped stacks up against Covidence on the workflow you actually run.
Mapped vs Covidence