Back to customer servicesResearch teams

Your data are verified. Finish a defined analysis module.

Your team has screened, extracted and verified the data but is stuck on effect selection, study dependencies, missing information or conventional analysis and interpretation.

How does this scope address your concerns?

You do not want to pay again for searches and extraction already completed, or receive a forest plot without traceable data and code.

When this scope fits

You have verified extraction data that may be used lawfully
You need an agreed conventional analysis for 1 outcome and up to 20 independent studies
Your team wants to retain the code and reasoning for later review and use

When the scope needs adjusting

You only have references or full texts and still need complete screening and primary extraction
You need multiple outcomes, complex models, or a complete review within a single-module budget
You require statistical significance or target-journal acceptance as a delivery condition

REAL SOURCES · ILLUSTRATIVE REQUEST · DOWNLOADABLE SAMPLE

Resolve dependencies in 15 verified studies

Download sample packZIP

Own review: association with non-home discharge

Lower preoperative social connection → non-home discharge

OR 1.95 · 95% CI 1.35–2.81 · 9 studies; low certainty

Own preoperative-social-connection manuscript: OR1.95 (95%CI1.35–2.81). Observational association, not a support-intervention effect. A prior research reference, not results from the fictional 15-study client dataset.

Check	Finding / sample content	Use
Inputs	One outcome; illustrative 15 studies	Confirm independence and version
Synthesis decision	Poolability requires assessment	Document main and agreed sensitivity analyses
Acceptance	Finding direction is not acceptance	Reproduce results in the agreed environment

SOURCES USED IN THIS EXAMPLE

Prepared 5 Oct 2026 · Selected references, not an exhaustive systematic search

Scope & acceptance

Work covered by the quote

Buy the analysis stage you still need

Client-supplied, verified data; 1 outcome and up to 20 independent studies
Agreed conventional methods and sensitivity analyses; 1 revision round
Data-check records, code, result tables, a forest plot where appropriate, and 1 explanation and handover

No automatic renewal after delivery. New outcomes, models, or data batches require an agreed change to the work package.

Search, screening, primary extraction, and a complete systematic review are excluded
Additional outcomes, models, data batches, or complex statistics require scope confirmation first
Manuscript drafting, editing, submission materials and reviewer revisions are optional modules: separately agree manuscript stage, target format, revision rounds, author contributions and fees. They are not included by default.

Fictional example from the current psychology-team specification · A second outcome is assessed separately; the same data organization is not charged twice.

Acceptance criteria

Delivered results can be reproduced in the agreed runtime environment
Data, effect selection, missingness, and dependency handling are documented
The agreed 1 revision round and 1 handover are complete; positive findings, significance, citations, and acceptance are not conditions

Checking the evidence

The existing module specification covers client-supplied, verified data; methods and one revision round are agreed first.
Analysis depends on customer data, the data dictionary, and traceable original sources. Structural problems and data unsuitable for synthesis are documented.
Module-level data checks do not replace primary extraction and human verification of every full text. Additional review requires a separate scope.

Workflow and inputs

From inputs to delivery

Explore the workflow and deliverable structure. This preview does not run searches, read real records or produce medical findings.

01 / WORKFLOW PREVIEW

Confirm the work already done

Describe sources, extracted fields, verification status, the outcome, and where you are stuck.

What becomes visible

Separate existing work from the missing task to avoid buying the same work twice.

Methods, sources and professional responsibilities

THE BASIS FOR THIS SCOPE

Why this approach? Inspect the basis.

A research commission should specify searching, selection, synthesis, certainty and any updating process.

METHOD REFERENCE

PRISMA 2020

PRISMA Executive

Report the review transparently

Report why the review was done, how studies were identified and selected, the methods and the results.

Scope & access conditions

PRISMA is a reporting guideline, not quality certification or a guarantee of positive findings or publication.

Open official source

METHOD REFERENCE

GRADE · Cochrane Handbook

Cochrane · Chapter 14

Show effect size and confidence separately

Present important outcomes, relative and absolute effects, available data and certainty, with reasons for downgrading.

Scope & access conditions

GRADE evaluates a body of evidence for a particular outcome. Database inclusion or one study does not automatically establish high certainty.

Open official source

METHOD REFERENCE

PRISMA-LSR

PRISMA · 2024 extension

Record how the evidence is updated

The living-review reporting extension adds detail about the searching and updating process.

Scope & access conditions

It informs a living-review reporting scope; it does not establish that every EOS product already updates automatically.

Open official source

These references support problem definition and evidence appraisal. Your conclusions still require project-specific sources and professional review.

The value of this commissionDefine the stage you need, agree inputs, methods and reviewers, and receive its registers, analyses, figures or code with an issue record.

Research modules and analysis resultsCompare alternatives and value

Complete one screening, extraction or analysis stage and receive actual results for review and handover.

What to assess	Elicit / Covidence	Evidence OS · Commissioned scope
Service focus	Covidence and Elicit provide team screening, source-supported extraction, exports and reviewable workflows. Check their official descriptions for current functionality.	Define the stage you need, agree inputs, methods and reviewers, and receive its registers, analyses, figures or code with an issue record.
When to choose	Research tools suit teams with staff to execute and review the work. Compare commissioned modules by methods, review responsibility and outputs.	Proposed CNY 3,000 conventional-analysis example: verified data, one outcome, up to 20 independent studies, agreed conventional methods and one scoped revision. Screening, original extraction and complex analyses are separately scoped.

What the fee pays for: Proposed from CNY 3,000 per defined module. Example: CNY 1,500 at start and CNY 1,500 at acceptance. Quote actual inputs, methods and review hours; clinicians and research teams use the same fee for the same scope.
Value beyond this task: Input-issue records, agreed results, method notes, figures and code for team review and subsequent research.
How to assess value: Compare software, internal hours, professional review and rework for the same module; accept the agreed results and reproducibility materials.

Default delivery covers the agreed module. Manuscript drafts and submission materials are optional and itemised. The entry price does not include a complete review; no promise of significance or acceptance.

CHECK THE OFFICIAL SERVICE SCOPEElicit — Systematic Literature Reviews / Pricing Covidence — Systematic Review Platform

Reuse and updates after delivery

Your team retains code, input versions, and method records for verification and manuscript methods or supplements. Whether the same approach fits new data still needs assessment.

Agree reuse rights, retention and export periods, and future update fees when scoping.

Questions before commissioning

Can you work with missing SEs or different time windows?

First assess whether the data and agreed methods support analysis. Information that cannot reasonably be converted or pooled remains documented as an issue; values are not invented and pooling is not forced. Additional extraction, complex models, or new statistical methods require a separate scope.

Does “from CNY 3,000” cover a complete meta-analysis?

It covers a conventional module using verified data: 1 outcome, up to 20 independent studies, agreed methods, and one revision round. Search, screening, primary extraction, a complete systematic review, and additional outcomes are excluded.

Is a non-significant result an incomplete delivery?

No. Acceptance concerns documented sources and data issues, agreed analyses, reproducible code, and accurately reported limitations. The direction of results and journal decisions are not promised or used as the fee basis.

Are results or a paper delivered?

Receive executed, agreed analysis results, figures and code. A manuscript, editing, submission materials or complete study require separately scoped work, fees and revision rounds.

Define the delivery for your actual question.

Add your goal, available inputs and timing. Agree scope, review responsibilities and a quote before commissioning.

Request scope & quote

Explore other situations

Research teams

You have an idea. Validate it before launching a study.

Receive a topic-assessment report and study-design inputs: a defined PICO, competition, data gaps, proceed/narrow/pause reasons and next-stage scope and budget. This is not completed study results or a manuscript.

CNY 5,000–15,000 per topicSee the deliverable

Research teams

Your question and scope are clear. Commission the complete review.

Default delivery includes protocol/logs, extraction and appraisal, executed appropriate synthesis, a research report, data and code; inappropriate pooling is replaced with reasons and structured synthesis. Manuscript and submission materials are optional.

CNY 60,000–150,000 per defined systematic review or meta-analysisSee the deliverable

Research teams

A complete-study scale scenario: execute and review a large volume at milestones.

Receive the complete-study protocol, logs, executed synthesis, report, agreed review and reproducible data/code, with an update baseline. Manuscript, submission and additional revisions are optional.

Large: CNY 200,000–600,000; very large: CNY 500,000–1,500,000+See the deliverable

Other tasks in this area

Tier 1 · Topic assessment & feasibility Tier 3 · Complete systematic review / meta-analysis Complete-study scale example · Large multi-team projects