Now you can extract data into tables in a way that suits the review.
As a reviewer you can:
For more information on the new table feature head to the knowledge base
New option available in Extraction 2.0 that allows you to revert your template to the published version. For more information on publishing templates head to this article on the knowledge base.
When merging studies in Extraction 2.0 it wasn’t clear which study was being selected as the study id. This has now been fixed and it is now clear what study is being selected.
When completing consensus the reviewers comments are now visible to help with your decision making in Extraction 2.0.
For more information on consensus head to this article on the knowledge base.
Extra functionality in Extraction 2.0 when editing your extraction templates.
For more information on publishing templates head to this article on the knowledge base.
When you updated your review team settings or criteria & exclusion reasons, reviews switched from Extraction 2.0 to Extraction 1.0. This has now been fixed and will no longer switch between the two when you change the settings.
Over the coming weeks we will be improving the publishing functionality within Extraction 2.0. The first of these, is a friendly warning to notify you of the implications when you select to start your data extraction template from scratch. For more information on publishing a template in Extraction 2.0 head to our knowledge base.
We’ve noticed our system is running a little slower than usual, and that some users may be encountering error messages when trying to access sections of their reviews. Our tech team is on it & working hard to find out why.
The maintenance and upgrade is now complete. We appreciate your patience during this time. Happy reviewing!
Maintenance on our site will be occurring today, Monday, 26 April, from 11am AEST/3am CEST/2am BST (Sunday, 25 April 9pm EDT/6pm PDT). For more information head to the FAQ or follow us on Twitter @Covidence
