ASReview vs Axelium

ASReview is a free, open-source tool that uses AI-aided active learning to prioritize records for systematic review screening, with a human making screening decisions. Its site says the approach can reduce screening workload by up to 95%. Users can simulate AI-aided review to compare models, while Crowdscreen supports parallel screening with access managed by administrators through a private login system. The described model families are ELAS-Ultra, ELAS-Heavy, and language-agnostic ELAS-L; ELAS-Heavy and ELAS-L require the Dory package. ASReview works with reference managers including EndNote and PubMed, and imports and exports CSV, RIS, and XLSX files. Documentation includes a Python API, while the institutional workflow also describes a REST API and CLI for automation. In a local setup, data stays on the user's computer; server deployments keep it in the organization's environment and follow its policies. Support includes documentation, tutorials, videos, community discussion, and organizational workshops and consultancy. ASReview LAB costs nothing with no licensing fees or subscriptions, though running hardware or a server may incur costs.

Axelium is an AI-assisted platform for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, spanning evidence search, screening, analysis, reporting, and living reviews. Its 11 stages include protocol, search, screening, full-text review, extraction, RoB 2.0, GRADE, statistics, network meta-analysis, reporting, and living reviews. The maker says AI extracts structured values while deterministic code calculates statistics, and data points link to snippets in original PDFs. Listed methods include pairwise and network synthesis, Cochrane RoB 2.0, GRADE certainty ratings, CERQual, and PRISMA-style reporting. It imports references from tools and databases including EndNote, Zotero, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Web of Science; exports include DOCX, XLSX, RIS, BibTeX, and RevMan. Team controls include roles, comments, dual-person sign-off, conflict adjudication, and versioned audit snapshots. A free plan includes one lifetime review and one seat; Researcher costs $29 a month. Human validation is needed for screening suggestions, extracted values, risk-of-bias assessments, and draft reports. Recurring statistical refresh for living-review network meta-analysis is paused, though scheduled cycles can import, screen, and extract new evidence.