I'm, conducting a Scoping review and I come across 2 different softwares that support the implementation: Ryyan and Covidence. What are you thoughs about that? They are mostly the "same" or one has more advantages than the other? Thank you.
Hi Mafalda, I hope youre well. I used covidence and found it to be very user friendly. It has a clear layout and saved me a lot of time. I recommend it.
Both Rayyan and Covidence are widely used tools for conducting systematic or scoping reviews, and each has its own strengths depending on your needs. Here’s a brief comparison:
✅ Rayyan
Advantages:
- Free to use.
- Simple and intuitive interface.
- Allows easy collaboration.
- Offers automatic keyword highlighting and filtering.
- Supports import of RIS and EndNote files.
Limitations:
- Limited tools for data extraction and quality assessment.
- Lacks built-in integration with PRISMA diagrams or critical appraisal templates.
- Covidence
Advantages:
- Specifically built for systematic and scoping reviews.
- Provides a full workflow: screening, full-text review, quality assessment, and data extraction.
- Integrates well with citation managers like EndNote or Zotero.
- Offers strong collaboration tools, especially for large teams.
- Facilitates PRISMA tracking and reporting.
Limitations:
- Paid subscription required (with limited free trial).
- Slightly steeper learning curve for new users.
Conclusion:
- If you’re working alone or with a small team and need a free, efficient tool, Rayyan is excellent.
- If your review is comprehensive and collaborative, especially in institutional or publication contexts, Covidence offers more advanced features worth the investment.
In addition to Covidence, I recommend https://gracelitrev.com/watch-demo
The tool automatically extracts metadata from selected papers and generates graphs essential for reporting in scoping/systematic reviews.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Chemistry, Organic
- Organic