Keep literature review decisions and extracted evidence traceable

What is Chat with PDF?

The Chat with PDF entry now leads to Paperguide, whose current product spans scientific literature workflows. It combines discovery, reference management, questions about papers, data extraction, and citation-supported writing. Systematic-review features add protocols, screening records, and reporting. The important distinction is traceability: a finding or extracted value is linked to the source statement so a researcher can inspect the evidence rather than accept a generated summary without a path back to the paper.

Organize the papers and the review method

Paperguide can import references from existing managers or add papers by identifier, keeping annotations and notes with the library. For a systematic review, define the protocol and screening criteria before processing the collection. The platform describes independent dual-review workflows and separate AI-assisted screening with verification. Select the method that fits the project and preserve human responsibility for inclusion decisions, conflicts, and changes to the protocol.

Extract evidence that another reviewer can check

Custom extraction columns turn selected papers into a comparison table, with each value linked to a source passage and export options for further analysis. Inspect units, population definitions, study periods, and missing values before combining results. The research agent and writing tools can then support synthesis, but the argument should reflect the strength and limitations of the included studies. PRISMA reporting is useful only when its counts match the recorded review process.

Features to explore

• Reference management
• Paper questions with citations
• Custom evidence extraction
• Screening and verification workflows
• Review reporting

Who is Chat with PDF for?

Researchers and review teams can assess Paperguide when they need a connected workspace for sources, screening, extraction, and writing, especially where another reviewer must be able to trace a conclusion or table value to its evidence.

Before you get started

Validate search coverage, screening decisions, extracted values, and citations yourself. Software support does not establish methodological rigor or clinical validity, and consequential evidence reviews still require appropriate subject expertise and documented human oversight.