Literature review
| Icon | 📚 |
| Skill | Literature Review Artifacts — on by default; manage it under Skills |
| Tool calls you’ll see | create_literature_review_table, patch_literature_review_table, add_paper_to_review, add_claim_to_paper |
| Sharing | A public link shows the rendered view and its underlying data |
What it’s for
Section titled “What it’s for”Systematic and narrative reviews, method comparisons, meta-analysis extraction, annotated reading lists — and checking whether a list of citations is real. Each row is one paper (title, authors, year, DOI) plus whatever columns you’re extracting: sample size, method, effect size, notes.
Every row is checked against the CrossRef registry and gets a verification badge. The assistant can’t mark a row as verified — only the check can — so a “Verified” badge means the paper exists as cited. See Papers and verification for what the badges mean.
Working with it
Section titled “Working with it”Edit any cell and Save. Search the table, filter by verification status, or Re-verify all to run the checks again. Individual claims attributed to a paper can be verified too.
Ask the assistant to add papers (“add the 2021 follow-up study”) or fill columns (“extract the sample size for each row”) and it updates the same table.
A table is a record of the day you made it. It changes when you edit it, when you click a verify button in it, or when the assistant edits it for you. A later check of the same paper somewhere else — in the chat’s citation panel or in your Library — doesn’t change the table. One exception: if a claim’s verdict turns out to have been decided on another document’s text (a wrong PDF), that verdict goes back to unverified, in the table too.
Download offers Word, BibTeX, RIS, CSV and Markdown.
Try asking
Section titled “Try asking”- “Build a literature review table for these papers.”
- “Are the citations in this manuscript real?”
- “Extract the method and sample size for each study in my library.”