
Asreview Screening
- 16 installs
- 869 repo stars
- Updated June 8, 2026
- beita6969/scienceclaw
asreview-screening is a Claude skill that runs ASReview active-learning models to prioritize and screen papers for systematic reviews.
About
Screens large sets of papers for systematic reviews by driving ASReview's active-learning models. A developer or researcher uses it when they have hundreds of papers to include/exclude and want the model to reprioritize the most-likely-relevant records after each decision. It also runs simulation mode to validate performance and produces PRISMA flow-diagram numbers.
- Uses ASReview active learning to prioritize papers for systematic-review screening
- Reports it can reduce manual screening workload by up to 95%
- Covers simulation-mode metrics: WSS@95, RRF@10, ATD, plus PRISMA flow numbers
Asreview Screening by the numbers
- 16 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #1,318 of 2,065 Data Science & ML skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 2, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
asreview-screening capabilities & compatibility
- Capabilities
- literature search · meta analysis · systematic review
- Use cases
- research
- Pricing
- Free
What asreview-screening says it does
Use active learning to prioritize and screen papers for systematic reviews, reducing manual workload by up to 95%.
ASReview uses machine learning to learn from your screening decisions and prioritize the most likely relevant papers.
The model learns from each decision and reprioritizes remaining papers
npx skills add https://github.com/beita6969/scienceclaw --skill asreview-screeningAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 16 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 869 |
| Last updated | June 8, 2026 |
| Repository | beita6969/scienceclaw ↗ |
What it does
Prioritize and screen a large corpus of papers for a systematic review using active learning instead of manual screening.
Who is it for?
Systematic reviewers with 50+ papers who want active learning to cut manual title/abstract screening.
Skip if: Searching for papers, running meta-analysis, or small sets under 50 papers where manual screening is faster.
When should I use this skill?
You have a large set of papers to screen for inclusion/exclusion and want to prioritize the most relevant ones.
What you get
A prioritized list of included/excluded papers plus PRISMA flow numbers, with much of the manual screening avoided.
- Prioritized included/excluded paper list
- Simulation metrics (WSS@95, RRF@10, ATD)
- PRISMA flow-diagram numbers
By the numbers
- reduces manual screening workload by up to 95%
- 4-step screening workflow
- recommends screening 50 consecutive irrelevant papers before stopping
Files
ASReview Screening
Use active learning to prioritize and screen papers for systematic reviews, reducing manual workload by up to 95%. ASReview uses machine learning to learn from your screening decisions and prioritize the most likely relevant papers.
When to Use
- "I have 500 papers to screen for my systematic review"
- "Help me prioritize papers for inclusion"
- "Set up active learning screening for my review"
- "How many papers do I need to screen manually?"
When NOT to Use
- Searching for papers (use literature-search)
- Performing meta-analysis (use meta-analysis)
- Writing the review (use systematic-review + paper-writing)
- Small sets (< 50 papers) — manual screening is faster
Setup
Install ASReview
pip install asreview asreview-insights asreview-datatoolsPrepare Input Data
ASReview accepts RIS, CSV, TSV, or Excel files with at minimum:
title: Paper titleabstract: Paper abstract
Optional but recommended:
doi,authors,year,keywords,label(if some are pre-labeled)
Export from Search Results
# Convert Semantic Scholar / OpenAlex results to ASReview format
import csv
def export_for_asreview(papers: list[dict], output_path: str):
"""Export papers to CSV for ASReview."""
with open(output_path, 'w', newline='', encoding='utf-8') as f:
writer = csv.DictWriter(f, fieldnames=[
'title', 'abstract', 'authors', 'year', 'doi', 'keywords'
])
writer.writeheader()
for p in papers:
writer.writerow({
'title': p.get('title', ''),
'abstract': p.get('abstract', ''),
'authors': '; '.join(a.get('name', '') for a in p.get('authors', [])),
'year': p.get('year', ''),
'doi': p.get('externalIds', {}).get('DOI', ''),
'keywords': '; '.join(p.get('fieldsOfStudy', []))
})
print(f"Exported {len(papers)} papers to {output_path}")Screening Workflow
Step 1: Create ASReview Project
# Start ASReview LAB (web interface)
asreview lab
# Or use the command-line simulation mode for automated screening
asreview simulate your_papers.csv \
--state_file output/simulation.asreview \
--model nb \
--feature_extraction tfidf \
--query_strategy max \
--balance_strategy double \
--n_prior_included 5 \
--n_prior_excluded 5Step 2: Prior Knowledge
Provide seed papers to initialize the model:
- Include 1-5 papers you know are relevant (included)
- Include 1-5 papers you know are irrelevant (excluded)
- More diverse priors = better initial model
Step 3: Active Learning Loop
# Programmatic screening with ASReview
from asreview import ASReviewData, ReviewSimulate
from asreview.models import NBModel
from asreview.query_strategies import MaxQuery
from asreview.feature_extraction import Tfidf
# Load data
data = ASReviewData.from_file("papers.csv")
# Configure model
model = NBModel()
query_strategy = MaxQuery()
feature_extraction = Tfidf()
# The model learns from each decision and reprioritizes remaining papers
# In practice, use the web interface (asreview lab) for interactive screeningStep 4: Stopping Criteria
When to stop screening:
| Method | Rule | Conservative? |
|---|---|---|
| Consecutive irrelevant | Stop after N consecutive irrelevant papers | Moderate |
| Percentage | Screen top 10-20% of all papers | Conservative |
| Recall target | Estimate 95% recall reached | Model-dependent |
| ASReview heuristic | Stop when model confidence stabilizes | Built-in |
Recommended: Screen until you've seen at least 50 consecutive irrelevant papers after finding all known relevant papers.
Quality Assessment
Simulation for Validation
If you have a fully labeled dataset, simulate to assess ASReview's performance:
# Run simulation
asreview simulate labeled_papers.csv \
--state_file simulation.asreview
# Generate metrics
asreview insights simulation.asreview \
--output metrics.json
# Key metrics:
# - WSS@95: Work Saved over Sampling at 95% recall
# - RRF@10: Relevant Records Found after screening 10%
# - ATD: Average Time to DiscoveryInterpreting Results
| Metric | Good | Excellent |
|---|---|---|
| WSS@95 | > 70% | > 85% |
| RRF@10 | > 40% | > 60% |
| ATD | < 30% of dataset | < 15% of dataset |
Integration with Systematic Review Workflow
literature-search → export results → asreview-screening → filtered papers → systematic-review1. literature-search: Multi-database search, deduplication 2. Export: Convert to ASReview-compatible format (CSV/RIS) 3. ASReview screening: Active learning prioritization 4. Output: List of included/excluded papers with reasons 5. systematic-review: Data extraction, meta-analysis, PRISMA report
PRISMA Flow Diagram Numbers
After screening, report:
- Total records identified (from all databases)
- Duplicates removed
- Records screened (title/abstract)
- Records excluded (with reasons)
- Full-text articles assessed
- Studies included in synthesis
Advanced Features
Multiple Models
# Compare model performance
asreview simulate papers.csv --model nb --state_file sim_nb.asreview
asreview simulate papers.csv --model svm --state_file sim_svm.asreview
asreview simulate papers.csv --model logistic --state_file sim_lr.asreviewDeduplication
# Remove duplicates before screening
asreview data dedup input.csv --output deduped.csvBest Practices
1. Always provide diverse prior knowledge (relevant + irrelevant examples) 2. Use at least 2-3 relevant and 5-10 irrelevant seed papers 3. Screen conservatively — missing a relevant paper is worse than extra screening 4. Document your stopping criteria and justify in the methods section 5. Run simulation on a subset if possible to estimate recall 6. Export screening decisions for PRISMA flow diagram 7. Never fabricate screening statistics or WSS values
Zero-Hallucination Rule
- ALL screening statistics must come from actual ASReview output
- NEVER estimate recall without running a proper simulation
- Report exact numbers from the screening log, not approximations
Related skills
FAQ
How much manual screening does ASReview save?
The skill states active learning can reduce manual screening workload by up to 95%.
When should I not use it?
Not for searching papers, meta-analysis, or small sets under 50 papers where manual screening is faster.