Table 1.
Current deduplication tools and approaches for systematic reviews
| Tool | Description | Resource required | Accessibility | Performance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EndNote [11] | Citation manager | Medium (requires manual effort to improve sensitivity) | Low (requires a paid subscription) | Low—medium (user-dependent) [4, 5, 8, 12] |
| SRA-DM [12] | Web/desktop application | Low | High | High |
| Revtools [13] |
R package with functions: find_duplicates() |
Medium (users set threshold for deduplication) | Medium (R knowledge required) | Unknown |
| bibliometrix [14] |
R package with functions: duplicatedMatching() mergeDbSources() |
Medium (users set threshold for deduplication; ability to merge Web of Science and Scopus citations) | Medium (R knowledge required) | Unknown |
| synthesisr [13] |
R package with functions: deduplicate() |
Medium (users set threshold for for deduplication) | Medium (R knowledge required) | Unknown |
| Metta [15] | Cross database search engine | Low | Medium (not openly accessible) | High [9] |
| Zotero [16] | Citation manager | Medium (manual merging required) | High | Low [10] |
| Covidence | Systematic review platform | Low | Low (requires paid subscription) | High [10] |
| Mendeley [17] | Citation manager | Medium (manual merging required) | High | High [8, 10] |
| Hand-searching | Manual | High | Low | High [4] |