Community · E2 · artifact verified
Extract clinical review data as verbatim quotes
A browser app for systematic-review extraction: Jev never writes the answer - it points at line ids in trial reports and supplements, and code copies the quote out with its file, page, row, or slide, highlighted where it sits.
01 · Role in the system
What Jev does here
Files are read and segmented entirely in the browser - PDF, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OpenDocument, saved pages, CSV, text - into sentences and table rows with stable line ids. Pass one asks, per chunk of two or three pages, a Choice of which line answers each extraction question (none is an option) plus a Noul of whether the passage answers it at all. Pass two re-verifies the best lines and their neighbors, one Noul each; quotes are the lines that clear 0.5, adjacent lines merged, table labels attached. Because Jev only points and code copies, nothing can be paraphrased and so nothing can be invented. Templates ship for trial characteristics, RoB 2, ROBINS-I, QUADAS-2, TIDieR, and outcome data, and studies import from EndNote, Zotero, Mendeley, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Covidence, or Rayyan.
02 · Control boundary
Where Jev sits
Two passes over line-id-indexed segments - a screening Choice per question per chunk, then a verification Noul per candidate line; quote text is always copied by code, never generated.
Code owns the loop, permissions, thresholds, validation, and side effects. Jev owns only the bounded judgments described above.
03 · Known limits
What this evidence does not prove
- Answers are bounded by what the files state; a question the documents do not answer comes back as such rather than inferred.
- Projects live in the browser's storage with no server, so clearing site data loses them unless exported.
- The hosted demo's availability depends on the author's own hosting.
04 · Attribution
Public sources
This is a Community record: the project was published by a third-party community author.