Produce systematic review protocols efficiently.
Move from review question to structured protocol in guided steps: review type prediction, PICOTS/PCC/CMO framing, protocol registration, search strategy, screening plan, and synthesis logic in one connected workflow.
Best-fit review design selected with alternatives.
Eligibility criteria structured and operationalized.
Database and grey literature plan prepared for review.
Thirteen connected steps from question to draft protocol.
Each step builds on the last. Complete all thirteen for a review-ready systematic review protocol.
Review type prediction
Match your question to the optimal design from 10 review types with alternatives for review.
Eligibility framework
Adaptive PICOTS, PCC, or CMO framework based on review type, operationalized for inclusion/exclusion criteria.
Research question
Structured review question with scope, population boundaries, and comparator or context specificity.
Protocol registration
PROSPERO, OSF, or Cochrane registration plan with field-by-field guidance.
Theory & logic model
Logic model or realist theory (CMO for realist reviews) guiding synthesis framework.
Search strategy
Database selection, MeSH/keyword block, grey literature sources, and search date rationale.
Screening plan
Title/abstract and full-text screening workflow, inter-rater reliability approach, and Rayyan/Covidence guidance.
Quality assessment
Tool selection (RoB2, ROBINS-I, QUADAS-2, AMSTAR 2) with domain-level guidance.
Data extraction plan
Extraction template fields, duplicate management, and missing data handling.
Synthesis strategy
Narrative synthesis, vote counting, or quantitative pooling logic with heterogeneity thresholds.
Meta-analysis plan
Effect measure, model selection (fixed vs random), subgroup analyses, and publication bias assessment.
GRADE certainty
Evidence certainty assessment plan per outcome with downgrading criteria documented.
Protocol output
Reviewable draft in three detail tiers — standard, academic, journal-ready.
See what the protocol draft looks like.
This is a preview of what the workflow produces. Every section is editable before expert sign-off.
Review objective
Systematically review and meta-analyse the effect of structured exercise interventions on depressive symptom severity (HAM-D, PHQ-9, BDI) in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus, based on RCT evidence published between January 2010 and December 2025.
Eligibility criteria (PICOTS)
Population: adults ≥18 with confirmed T2DM. Intervention: structured aerobic, resistance, or combined exercise. Comparator: usual care or waitlist. Outcome: validated depression scale change score. Timing: ≥4 weeks. Setting: any. Design: RCTs only.
Search strategy outline
Databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, WHO ICTRP. Search blocks: diabetes AND exercise AND depression, expanded with MeSH terms. Grey literature: ClinicalTrials.gov, PROSPERO, Google Scholar (first 200 results). Duplicate removal via Zotero.
Generic AI output
- Unstructured with mixed assumptions
- No clear step progression
- Harder for teams to review and revise
- Confidence without boundaries
ReviewMinds workflow
- Connected sequence from question to protocol
- Adaptive PICOTS/PCC/CMO framework per review type
- PROSPERO registration guidance built in
- PRISMA 2020-oriented output with transparent logic
What researchers ask before they start.
What review types does ReviewMinds support?
ReviewMinds covers 10 types: systematic review with meta-analysis, systematic review without pooling, scoping review, rapid review, umbrella review, network meta-analysis, realist review, integrative review, narrative review, and Cochrane-style review.
How does ReviewMinds handle PICOTS vs PCC vs CMO?
The eligibility framework in Step 2 adapts automatically. Intervention reviews use PICOTS, scoping reviews use PCC (Population, Concept, Context), and realist reviews use CMO (Context, Mechanism, Outcome) with theory-driven logic model guidance.
Does ReviewMinds help with PROSPERO registration?
Yes. Step 4 provides field-by-field guidance for PROSPERO registration, including eligibility criteria format, search strategy summary, and the planned synthesis approach — all framed to PROSPERO requirements.
What’s included free?
Review type prediction (Step 1) is free with login — identify the best review design for your question. All PRISMA 2020 checklists and PROSPERO field guides are also free for members.
Start with review type prediction. Stay for the full workflow.
Identify your optimal systematic review design for free. Unlock the complete 13-step protocol workflow with Scholar Pro.
“The quality of your research can never exceed the clarity of your method.” — Rajesh S.K., Founder