A practical workflow for PubMed literature reviews
A biomedical literature review needs a focused question, transparent retrieval, relevance screening, selected evidence, synthesis, and careful citation checks.
Biomedical literature reviews are hard because the volume of papers is high and the cost of overclaiming is serious. A practical workflow should make each decision visible before the draft is exported.
Start with a question that can be screened
A question like "semaglutide and obesity" is broad. A better review question names the population, intervention or exposure, comparator if relevant, and outcome. The clearer the question, the easier it is to screen papers.
Separate retrieval from inclusion
Retrieved papers are candidates, not evidence yet. LitSynth treats paper selection as a deliberate step: the user reviews relevance explanations and chooses which records should enter the synthesis.
Draft only after selection
Generating a review before selecting papers creates unnecessary citation risk. A better workflow is:
- search;
- inspect relevance;
- select papers;
- generate the draft;
- audit claims and citations.
Keep clinical boundaries clear
LitSynth can support biomedical review drafting, but it does not provide medical advice. Clinical conclusions need qualified review, original-paper verification, and methods appropriate to the study purpose.
Use the PubMed literature review workflow to structure retrieval and screening, or open the AI literature review generator when your question is ready.