free article review generator

Article Review Generator

Here is your article critique :

Writing an article review can become a daunting task for any student. It requires analyzing the article’s content, evaluating it, and sharing personal insights. Stuck with summarizing the article rather than criticizing it? Use this article review generator!

• ️🎤 What Is This Review Generator?
• ️👑 Article Review Generator Benefits
• ️🤔 When to Use the Tool
• ️✍️ How to Write an Article Review
• ️❓ Article Review Generator Free: FAQ
• ️🔗 References

🎤 What Is the Article Review Generator?

Our online article review generator is an excellent solution for crafting comprehensive reviews. It offers in-depth analysis while ensuring that the main ideas from the article are effectively highlighted. The tool allows students to focus on critical evaluation and personal insights rather than getting bogged down in summarization.

An article review is a piece that critically evaluates and analyzes a scholarly article or research paper. It involves summarizing the article’s main points, assessing its strengths and weaknesses, and providing personal opinion.

You may need to write an article analysis:

• To provide a critique of a specific article or paper.
• To contribute to academic discourse by evaluating scholarly work.
• To improve your writing skills via summarizing, analyzing, and critiquing complex texts.
• To deepen understanding of a topic.
• To prepare for future research projects.

👑 Online Article Review Generator: 6 Benefits

Many benefits make our article review summary generator stand out. For example, it is:

🤔 When to Use the Article Reviewer Tool?

Our tool is not only helpful in writing article reviews, but it also comes in handy for a variety of other purposes. Here are some cases when you can use the article review summary generator:

• Analyze the article’s strengths and weaknesses.
• Quickly understand the key points and arguments of the article.
• Get a new perspective on the article’s content and structure.
• Generate a concise summary of an article.
• Understand complex articles more effectively.
• Improve writing skills .
• Be informed about current developments.
• Prepare for exams or presentations.
• Facilitate collaboration during group projects.
• Get multiple article summaries for the literature review.

✍️ How to Write an Article Review

You can always use our online article review generator to analyze and critique an article quickly. However, if you have time and wish to enhance your academic writing skills, consider writing the review yourself. To help you with this, we’ve prepared a step-by-step tutorial for crafting a compelling article review .

Step 1 – Preparation

First of all, you should clearly understand the goal of this assignment. An article review is more than just a summary or your opinion on a publication. It involves a critical analysis and assessment of the content.

Here’s what to do to prepare for composing an article review:

• Assess the title. Before delving into the paper, consider what the title suggests about its content and the potential focus of the author’s argument.
• Analyze the structure. Subheadings can offer a roadmap of the article’s organization. Focus on them to get an overview of the key topics the author will explore.
• Understand the main idea. Identify the article’s central argument or thesis. It is the primary claim or position the author is asserting.
• Analyze the abstract. An abstract is a condensed version of the article. It offers a glimpse into the main arguments, research methodology, and conclusions.

Step 2 – Reading

Carefully reading an article is vital for making a well-informed evaluation , so don’t underestimate this stage. Take notes or use highlighters to keep track of the information you might refer to later. We suggest paying attention to:

• Intended audience. Determine who the article is addressing. Consider potential readers’ level of expertise, interests, and background knowledge.
• Author’s purpose. Does the writer aim to summarize extant research, put forward a fresh argument, or refute others’ claims?
• Key terms. Note whether the author defines key concepts. A straightforward definition of terminology helps understand the writer’s arguments better.
• Facts and opinions. Differentiate between objective information and the author’s views. Assess the adequacy and reliability of the presented information.
• Central arguments and conclusions. Evaluate their clarity, coherence, and the degree to which they are reinforced by evidence and analysis.
• Methodology and findings. Examine the methods and expected results in the article. Assess the research credibility and the clarity of the reported findings.
• Visual aids. If the article contains illustrations or charts, analyze their effectiveness in communicating information and strengthening the message.

Step 3 – Outlining & Drafting

Outlining an article review can help you arrange your ideas and guarantee that your paper is logical and coherent. Usually, an outline comprises an introduction, the body of the review, and a conclusion.

When outlining, work on your thesis statement . It is a sentence or two that presents your main argument about the article, which you will support and develop in your review.

After finishing your outline, you can move on to writing a draft. These are the main components for each section of an article review:

• Hook (attention-grabbing opening).
• Background information on the article.
• Thesis statement.
• Summary of the article.
• Analysis and evaluation.
• Restated thesis statement.
• Summary of your main points.
• Final evaluation of the article.
• Suggestions for further research or areas for improvement.

Step 4 – Writing

The final stage of writing an article critique involves reviewing and polishing the draft. It is important to revise the piece and check for any mistakes or inconsistencies. Additionally, we recommend double-checking all citations and references and ensuring they are carefully formatted according to the requirements provided in the assignment.

During the review and polishing process, consider the following:

• Review title. Consider creating a suitable title for the article review if a title is not provided. A good article review title should convey the text’s main focus, include keywords, and hint at what readers can expect from the review.
• Reference list. Include a reference list to acknowledge and give credit to the sources you have used in your review. Even if the review only references the article being analyzed, the reference list should include this article.

❓ Article Review Generator Free: FAQ

❓ what is an article review.

An article review critically evaluates and analyzes a scholarly article or research paper. It summarizes the main points, critiques the methodology, and discusses the significance and potential limitations of the work. Article reviews are a common assignment among high school and college students.

❓ How to write an article review?

Writing an article review starts with thorough preparation and understanding of the article’s context. Then, carefully read the article to identify critical points and evaluate the author’s arguments. Finally, provide a well-reasoned and supported assessment of the article’s overall quality and contribution. You can always use our article review generator for the best summary and evaluation.

❓ Where is the literature review in an article?

The literature review in an article is typically situated after the introduction or in the body section. It draws a comprehensive overview of existing research relevant to the article’s topic. However, not all article reviews require a literature review. It’s better to consult the professor or review guidelines to determine if a literature review is necessary for the specific assignment.

❓ How to start an article review?

To begin an article review, start by introducing the article’s title, author, and publication date. Provide a brief overview of the article’s main topic and purpose. Consider setting the context by explaining the topic’s significance and the article’s relevance to the field. Lastly, state your thesis or main argument regarding the article’s quality and contribution.

Updated: Aug 21st, 2024

🔗 References

• How to Write an Article Review (with Sample Reviews) – wikiHow
• Research Guides: Introduction to Research: Humanities and Social Sciences: Critical Reviews
• How to Review a Journal Article | University of Illinois Springfield
• Research Guides: Writing Help: The Article Review

Please sign up and get FREE credits

Free AI literature review generator

Trusted by millions of professionals. over 1,000+ 5-star ratings..

This AI writing assistant is a Lifesaver .

Free AI Tools for Everyday Use

Discover the best ai generators to simplify your daily tasks, free ai linkedin profile generator, free ai linkedin post generator, free ai lesson plan generator, free ai legal document generator, free ai llc name generator, free ai long story generator, free ai love story generator, free ai marketing plan generator.

Get started with   Free AI literature review generator today.

Start Enjoying AI Without Spending a Dime!

Useful Content

Ai generators.

Summarize any | in a click.

TLDR This helps you summarize any piece of text into concise, easy to digest content so you can free yourself from information overload.

Enter an Article URL or paste your Text

Browser extensions.

Use TLDR This browser extensions to summarize any webpage in a click.

Single platform, endless summaries

Transforming information overload into manageable insights — consistently striving for clarity.

100% Automatic Article Summarization with just a click

In the sheer amount of information that bombards Internet users from all sides, hardly anyone wants to devote their valuable time to reading long texts. TLDR This's clever AI analyzes any piece of text and summarizes it automatically, in a way that makes it easy for you to read, understand and act on.

Article Metadata Extraction

TLDR This, the online article summarizer tool, not only condenses lengthy articles into shorter, digestible content, but it also automatically extracts essential metadata such as author and date information, related images, and the title. Additionally, it estimates the reading time for news articles and blog posts, ensuring you have all the necessary information consolidated in one place for efficient reading.

• Automated author-date extraction
• Related images consolidation
• Instant reading time estimation

Distraction and ad-free reading

As an efficient article summarizer tool, TLDR This meticulously eliminates ads, popups, graphics, and other online distractions, providing you with a clean, uncluttered reading experience. Moreover, it enhances your focus and comprehension by presenting the essential content in a concise and straightforward manner, thus transforming the way you consume information online.

Avoid the Clickbait Trap

TLDR This smartly selects the most relevant points from a text, filtering out weak arguments and baseless speculation. It allows for quick comprehension of the essence, without needing to sift through all paragraphs. By focusing on core substance and disregarding fluff, it enhances efficiency in consuming information, freeing more time for valuable content.

• Filters weak arguments and speculation
• Highlights most relevant points
• Saves time by eliminating fluff

Who is TLDR This for?

TLDR This is a summarizing tool designed for students, writers, teachers, institutions, journalists, and any internet user who needs to quickly understand the essence of lengthy content.

Anyone with access to the Internet

TLDR This is for anyone who just needs to get the gist of a long article. You can read this summary, then go read the original article if you want to.

TLDR This is for students studying for exams, who are overwhelmed by information overload. This tool will help them summarize information into a concise, easy to digest piece of text.

TLDR This is for anyone who writes frequently, and wants to quickly summarize their articles for easier writing and easier reading.

TLDR This is for teachers who want to summarize a long document or chapter for their students.

Institutions

TLDR This is for corporations and institutions who want to condense a piece of content into a summary that is easy to digest for their employees/students.

Journalists

TLDR This is for journalists who need to summarize a long article for their newspaper or magazine.

Featured by the world's best websites

Our platform has been recognized and utilized by top-tier websites across the globe, solidifying our reputation for excellence and reliability in the digital world.

Focus on the Value, Not the Noise.

Revolutionize Your Research with Jenni AI

Literature Review Generator

Welcome to Jenni AI, the ultimate tool for researchers and students. Our AI Literature Review Generator is designed to assist you in creating comprehensive, high-quality literature reviews, enhancing your academic and research endeavors. Say goodbye to writer's block and hello to seamless, efficient literature review creation.

Loved by over 3 million academics

Endorsed by Academics from Leading Institutions

Join the Community of Scholars Who Trust Jenni AI

Elevate Your Research Toolkit

Discover the Game-Changing Features of Jenni AI for Literature Reviews

Advanced AI Algorithms

Jenni AI utilizes cutting-edge AI technology to analyze and suggest relevant literature, helping you stay on top of current research trends.

Get started

Idea Generation

Overcome writer's block with AI-generated prompts and ideas that align with your research topic, helping to expand and deepen your review.

Citation Assistance

Get help with proper citation formats to maintain academic integrity and attribute sources correctly.

Our Pledge to Academic Integrity

At Jenni AI, we are deeply committed to the principles of academic integrity. We understand the importance of honesty, transparency, and ethical conduct in the academic community. Our tool is designed not just to assist in your research, but to do so in a way that respects and upholds these fundamental values.

How it Works

Start by creating your account on Jenni AI. The sign-up process is quick and user-friendly.

Define Your Research Scope

Enter the topic of your literature review to guide Jenni AI’s focus.

Citation Guidance

Receive assistance in citing sources correctly, maintaining the academic standard.

Easy Export

Export your literature review to LaTeX, HTML, or .docx formats

Interact with AI-Powered Suggestions

Use Jenni AI’s suggestions to structure your literature review, organizing it into coherent sections.

What Our Users Say

Discover how Jenni AI has made a difference in the lives of academics just like you

I thought AI writing was useless. Then I found Jenni AI, the AI-powered assistant for academic writing. It turned out to be much more advanced than I ever could have imagined. Jenni AI = ChatGPT x 10.

Charlie Cuddy

@sonofgorkhali

Love this use of AI to assist with, not replace, writing! Keep crushing it @Davidjpark96 💪

Waqar Younas, PhD

@waqaryofficial

4/9 Jenni AI's Outline Builder is a game-changer for organizing your thoughts and structuring your content. Create detailed outlines effortlessly, ensuring your writing is clear and coherent. #OutlineBuilder #WritingTools #JenniAI

I started with Jenni-who & Jenni-what. But now I can't write without Jenni. I love Jenni AI and am amazed to see how far Jenni has come. Kudos to http://Jenni.AI team.

Jenni is perfect for writing research docs, SOPs, study projects presentations 👌🏽

Stéphane Prud'homme

http://jenni.ai is awesome and super useful! thanks to @Davidjpark96 and @whoisjenniai fyi @Phd_jeu @DoctoralStories @WriteThatPhD

Frequently asked questions

What exactly does jenni ai do, is jenni ai suitable for all academic disciplines, is there a trial period or a free version available.

How does Jenni AI help with writer's block?

Can Jenni AI write my literature review for me?

How often is the literature database updated in Jenni AI?

How user-friendly is Jenni AI for those not familiar with AI tools?

Jenni AI: Standing Out From the Competition

In a sea of online proofreaders, Jenni AI stands out. Here’s how we compare to other tools on the market:

Feature Featire

COMPETITORS

Advanced AI-Powered Assistance

Uses state-of-the-art AI technology to provide relevant literature suggestions and structural guidance.

May rely on simpler algorithms, resulting in less dynamic or comprehensive support.

User-Friendly Interface

Designed for ease of use, making it accessible for users with varying levels of tech proficiency.

Interfaces can be complex or less intuitive, posing a challenge for some users.

Transparent and Flexible Pricing

Offers a free trial and clear, flexible pricing plans suitable for different needs.

Pricing structures can be opaque or inflexible, with fewer user options.

Unparalleled Customization

Offers highly personalized suggestions and adapts to your specific research needs over time.

Often provide generic suggestions that may not align closely with individual research topics.

Comprehensive Literature Access

Provides access to a vast and up-to-date range of academic literature, ensuring comprehensive research coverage.

Some may have limited access to current or diverse research materials, restricting the scope of literature reviews.

Ready to Transform Your Research Process?

Don't wait to elevate your research. Sign up for Jenni AI today and discover a smarter, more efficient way to handle your academic literature reviews.

🤖 AI Literature Review Generator

Unleash the power of AI with our Literature Review Generator. Effortlessly access comprehensive and meticulously curated literature reviews to elevate your research like never before!

Feeling overwhelmed by the sheer volume of books, articles, and papers you need to review for your research? You can use this free AI Literature Review Generator to streamline the work! This intuitive tool takes the hassle out of the process and makes planning and drafting literature reviews more efficient.

Think of this free AI Literature Review Generator as your personal research assistant. It uses advanced artificial intelligence techniques to fetch studies, identifies key points, and highlights important findings for you, so you can focus on analyzing and synthesizing information rather than spending hours reading.

What Is a Literature Review?

A literature review is a deep dive into academic sources like scholarly articles, books, and other publications related to your research topic. It’s about understanding the current landscape of your field and identifying the key players and pivotal works. More than just a summary, a literature review synthesizes existing knowledge to provide a comprehensive overview.

A literature review outlines what’s already known, highlights major debates, and points out gaps that still need exploring. This makes it an essential starting point for any academic research, whether it’s for a dissertation, thesis, or research article. Think of it as setting the stage for your research by clarifying the intellectual progression of your field. A well-crafted literature review helps you interpret your findings within the context of existing knowledge.

Finally, a literature review shows you where your work fits in and how it can contribute to the ongoing conversation in your area of study.

With our AI Literature Review Generator, you’ll get all these benefits without the usual stress and time commitment. So, let’s see how it can do the heavy lifting so you can focus on what you do best — researching and discovering new insights.

Why Use a Literature Review Generator?

Universities and academic institutions often require students to develop literature reviews. These targeted examinations of other studies related to your current research provide a robust foundation for your work. While developing literature reviews can enhance your academic skills, they can also be time-consuming and challenging due to the extensive research involved.

Using an online literature review generator in the process can be a game-changer. It takes the legwork out of sifting through countless sources and helps you zero in on the most relevant studies quickly. This means you can spend less time on tedious data collection and more time on the critical analysis that actually makes your work stand out. The tool’s ability to organize and structure your reviews also helps present your findings in a coherent and professional manner.

By automating much of the groundwork, a generator reduces the risk of errors and ensures you have accurate citations, enhancing the overall quality of your review. Plus, it serves as a valuable learning tool, teaching you how to structure a high-quality literature review, which is super beneficial for your academic growth.

Let’s take a closer look at a few more benefits of literature review generators:

• Ease of information gathering : Comprehensive studies require extensive reading and diligent research, which often takes hours to complete. Literature review generators automate the information-gathering process, retrieving relevant articles, journals, and related publications in a matter of seconds. This ensures a momentous saving of time and relieves the user from the tedious job of slogging through numerous resources.
• Coherent and well-structured reviews : Structuring the review in a logical and coherent manner can be a difficult task. Online literature review generators present well-structured reviews and offer well-organized input which can guide you in writing your own well-formulated literature review.
• Finds good matches : A literature review generator is designed to find the most relevant literature content according to your research topic. The expertise of these software tools allows users to ease the process of finding relevant scholarly articles and other documents, making it more accurate and faster than doing it manually.
• Reduces errors and improves quality : Humans are prone to making mistakes, especially when tasked with analyzing extensive volumes of data. Literature review generators minimize errors by ensuring access to the most accurate data and providing proper citations hence enhancing the quality of the review.
• Pedagogical benefits : Not only does using a free literature review generator provide a quick fix for students but it also serves as a tool for learning. It allows the users to understand how professional literature reviews should be structured and can guide them in crafting their work.
•  Time management : By automating the most time-consuming parts of the literature review process, you free up time to focus on other important aspects of your research or studies. This helps you manage your workload more effectively and reduces stress.
• Customizable searches : Literature review generators create structured, hiearchical documents. This means you can easily browse the contents of the reviews and find the information you need in an instant. This ensures you’re getting the most relevant and current information all the time.

How To Use This AI Literature Review Generator:

• Open your Taskade workspace and click “➕New project”.
• Choose “ 🤖 AI Project Studio ” and describe what you want to create.
• Use the drop-downs to define project type or upload seed sources .
• When done, customize your project to make it your own!

Please open the page in your browser to use this feature. Close

Upload your PDF, EPUB, DOCX, ODT, or TXT file here.

PDF, EPUB, DOCX, ODT, TXT

Or import your images / photos by clicking below

(JPEG / PNG)

Please wait... or cancel

Reading speed : 0.8

Go to the main ideas in your texts, summarize them « relevantly » in 1 Click

We advice + we design + we develope.

• Text example        

Text example    

Initialisation...

Identify the important ideas and facts

To help you summarize and analyze your argumentative texts , your articles, your scientific texts, your history texts as well as your well-structured analyses work of art, Resoomer provides you with a "Summary text tool" : an educational tool that identifies and summarizes the important ideas and facts of your documents. Summarize in 1-Click, go to the main idea or skim through so that you can then interpret your texts quickly and develop your syntheses .

Who is Resoomer for ?

College students.

With Resoomer, summarize your Wikipedia pages in a matter of seconds for your productivity.

Identify the most important ideas and arguments of your texts so that you can prepare your lessons.

JOURNALISTS

If you prefer simplified information that summarizes the major events, then Resoomer is for you !

Identify and understand very fast the facts and the ideas of your texts that are part of the current news and events.

PRESS RELEASES

With the help of Resoomer, go to the main idea of your articles to write your arguments and critiques .

Save time, summarize your digital documents for a relevant and fast uptake of information.

Need to summarize your books' presentations ? Identify the arguments in a matter of seconds.

Too many documents ? Simplify your readings with Resoomer like a desktop tool.

Need to summarize your chapters ? With Resoomer, go to the heart of your ideas.

Identify your books' or your authors' ideas quickly. Summarize the most important main points.

From now on, create quick summaries of your artists' presentation and their artworks .

INSTITUTIONS

Identify the most important passages in texts that contains a lot of words for detailed analyses .

They Tweeted

Follow @resoomer_     Tweeter

SUMMARIZE YOUR ONLINE ARTICLES IN 1-CLICK

Download the extension for your browser

Surf online and save time when reading on internet ! Resoomer summarizes your articles in 500 words so that you can go to the main idea of your text.

HOW DOES RESOOMER WORK ?

Popular articles

• Summary and synthesis: the difference?
• The text summarizer
• Summarize a text
• Summarize a document online
• Summarize an online article
• Read more and faster documents
• Argue and find arguments in a text
• Learn more": How to increase your knowledge?

  Our partners that like Resoom(er)ing their texts :  

RAxter is now Enago Read! Enjoy the same licensing and pricing with enhanced capabilities. No action required for existing customers.

Your all in one AI-powered Reading Assistant

A Reading Space to Ideate, Create Knowledge, and Collaborate on Your Research

• Smartly organize your research
• Receive recommendations that cannot be ignored
• Collaborate with your team to read, discuss, and share knowledge

From Surface-Level Exploration to Critical Reading - All in one Place!

Fine-tune your literature search.

Our AI-powered reading assistant saves time spent on the exploration of relevant resources and allows you to focus more on reading.

Select phrases or specific sections and explore more research papers related to the core aspects of your selections. Pin the useful ones for future references.

Our platform brings you the latest research related to your and project work.

Speed up your literature review

Quickly generate a summary of key sections of any paper with our summarizer.

Make informed decisions about which papers are relevant, and where to invest your time in further reading.

Get key insights from the paper, quickly comprehend the paper’s unique approach, and recall the key points.

Bring order to your research projects

Organize your reading lists into different projects and maintain the context of your research.

Quickly sort items into collections and tag or filter them according to keywords and color codes.

Experience the power of sharing by finding all the shared literature at one place.

Decode papers effortlessly for faster comprehension

Highlight what is important so that you can retrieve it faster next time.

Select any text in the paper and ask Copilot to explain it to help you get a deeper understanding.

Ask questions and follow-ups from AI-powered Copilot.

Collaborate to read with your team, professors, or students

Share and discuss literature and drafts with your study group, colleagues, experts, and advisors. Recommend valuable resources and help each other for better understanding.

Work in shared projects efficiently and improve visibility within your study group or lab members.

Keep track of your team's progress by being constantly connected and engaging in active knowledge transfer by requesting full access to relevant papers and drafts.

Find papers from across the world's largest repositories

Testimonials

Privacy and security of your research data are integral to our mission..

Everything you add or create on Enago Read is private by default. It is visible if and when you share it with other users.

You can put Creative Commons license on original drafts to protect your IP. For shared files, Enago Read always maintains a copy in case of deletion by collaborators or revoked access.

We use state-of-the-art security protocols and algorithms including MD5 Encryption, SSL, and HTTPS to secure your data.

AI Literature Review Generator

Generate high-quality literature reviews fast with ai.

• Academic Research: Create a literature review for your thesis, dissertation, or research paper.
• Professional Research: Conduct a literature review for a project, report, or proposal at work.
• Content Creation: Write a literature review for a blog post, article, or book.
• Personal Research: Conduct a literature review to deepen your understanding of a topic of interest.

New & Trending Tools

Get webpage text from url, ai web scraper, ai resume updater.

Summarize any text with One Click

Sample Text

Generate Accurate Summaries in 3 seconds

Our summary generator uses advanced AI technology to break down your long content into quick, digestible summaries in just one click. Use it to summarize your articles, academic papers, business reports, or any kind of content.

Get the Important Facts & Data

This text summarizer quickly extracts important information from large texts and presents complex content in engaging chunks. You get the most relevant and crucial data in just one click.

Choose Your Summary Length & Style

You can customize the length and format of the summary. Create a quick content overview for your blog post or get a detailed summary for your academic research. You’ve also got an option to generate the summary in paragraph form or bullet points.

Over 5000 users like you have used this summary generator to convert their lengthy text into efficient, 100% accurate summaries

“During my PhD research, SummaryGenerator.io proved invaluable. It quickly distills the main ideas of complex academic papers. The tool`s precision in highlighting relevant data and arguments made my literature review process much more manageable.”

“As a freelance writer, this text summarizer has been a game-changer for me. It efficiently condenses long articles, helping me research and write faster. The summaries are concise and comprehensive, saving me hours of reading.”

How Does the Text Summary Generator Work?

Enter the Text

You can copy the text and paste it into the box above, or upload a file from your desktop. You can upload a Doc or PDF file.

Choose the Summary Length and Style

Choose your desired summary size between small, medium-length, and large summary options. Decide if you want the summary in paragraph form or bullet points.

Get Your Summary

Click the “Summarize” button, and you’ll get the summary in a few seconds. You can simply copy the generated summary or download it as a Doc or PDF file. That’s all!

What Kind of Content Can You Summarize with this Summary Generator?

Academic papers.

Quickly turn complex research papers or articles into easy to digest summaries.

Business Reports

Overwhelmed by business reports? Instantly get the key insights and data from extensive reports.

News Articles

Get the gist of current events and news stories without reading the full text.

Book Summaries

Create brief overviews of books for study or leisure reading.

Technical Documents

Struggling with technical jargon? Simplify technical content into digestible summaries.

Meeting Minutes

Need to recap meetings? Convert long meeting notes into clear, actionable points.

• Generate Your Summary Now!

Boost your writing productivity

Ready to transform your text.

SummaryGenerator.io turns your lengthy texts into crisp, clear summaries with just one click.

• Summarize Now
• Free to use
• Generate summaries in 3 seconds
• No signup required

Frequently Asked Questions

How can i write a summary online for free, what is the best free ai for summarizing, how do you write an ai summary, can ai summarize a pdf, upgrade to pro.

We currently support a maximum of 10,000 words.

To Our Community,

We regret to inform you that smmry.com will be ceasing its services.

Over the years, it has been an honor to assist students, educators, and curious minds in mastering the art of summarization. We appreciate your support and trust in our platform as a valuable tool in the educational journey.

Thank you for being a part of our community.

James, Founder of smmry.com

• Essay Topic Generator
• Essay Grader
• Reference Finder
• AI Outline Generator
• Paragraph Expander
• Essay Expander
• Literature Review Generator
• Thesis Generator
• Text Editing Tools
• AI Rewording Tool
• AI Sentence Rewriter
• AI Article Spinner
• AI Grammar Checker
• Spell Checker
• PDF Spell Check
• Paragraph Checker
• Free AI Essay Writer
• Paraphraser
• Grammar Checker
• Citation Generator
• Plagiarism Checker
• AI Detector
• AI Essay Checker
• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• AI Writing Guides
• AI Detection Guides
• Citation Guides
• Grammar Guides
• Paraphrasing Guides
• Plagiarism Guides
• Summary Writing Guides
• STEM Guides
• Humanities Guides
• Language Learning Guides
• Coding Guides
• Top Lists and Recommendations
• AI Detectors
• AI Writing Services
• Coding Homework Help
• Citation Generators
• Editing Websites
• Essay Writing Websites
• Language Learning Websites
• Math Solvers
• Paraphrasers
• Plagiarism Checkers
• Reference Finders
• Spell Checkers
• Summarizers
• Tutoring Websites
• Essay Checkers
• Essay Topic Finders

AHelp Article Summarizer

Tailor-made summary for your article.

Smart Key Point Extraction

Custom Summary Lengths

Context-Aware Summarization

Free article summarizing tool.

Remember Me

What is your profession ? Student Teacher Writer Other

Forgotten Password?

Username or Email

Screen, analyse and summarise articles faster with Scholarcy

Try it for free, subscribe today.

Scholarcy is used by students around the world to read and analyse research papers in less time. Upload your articles to Scholarcy to:

• Cut your reading time in half and feel more in control
• Identify the papers that matter in less time
• Jump straight to the most important information
• Compare a collection of articles more easily

With Scholarcy Library, you can import all your papers and search results, and quickly screen them with the automatically generated ‘key takeaway’ headline.

Take the stress out of your literature review

While there are lots of tools that help you discover articles for your research, how do you analyse and synthesise the information from all of those papers?

3 easy ways to import articles

Scholarcy lets you quickly import your articles for screening and analysing.

Import papers in PDF, Word, HTML and LaTeX format

Import search results from PubMed or any service that provides results in RIS or BibTeX format

Import publisher RSS feeds

Build your literature matrix in minutes

Our Excel export feature generates a literature synthesis matrix for you, so you can

Compare papers side by side for their study sizes, key contributions, limitations, and more.

Export literature-review ready data in Excel, Word, RIS or Markdown format

Integrates with your reference manager and ‘second brain’ tools such as Roam, Notion and Obsidian

Carrying out a systematic review?

Scholarcy breaks papers down into our unique summary flashcard format.

The Study subjects and analysis tab shows you study population, intervention, outcome, and statistical analyses from the paper.

And the Excel synthesis matrix generated shows the key methods and quantitative findings of each paper, side by side.

Build a knowledge graph from your papers

If you’re a fan of the latest generation of knowledge management tools such as  Roam  or  Obsidian , you’ll love our  Markdown  export.

This creates a knowledge graph of all the papers in your library by connecting them via key terms, methods, and shared citations.

What People Are Saying

“Quick processing time, successfully summarized important points.”

“It’s really good for case study analysis, thank you for this too.”

“I love this website so much it has made my research a lot easier thanks!”

“The instant feedback I get from this tool is amazing.”

“Thank you for making my life easier.”

Journal Critique Generator

Need help critiquing a research article? Try our free journal critique generator! Just paste your article and get an inspiring critique example in a few seconds!

Writing a journal critique is very easy with the free tool we've made! Just take the 3 steps below:

• ⭐ Tool Benefits

🤔 What Is a Journal Critique?

📋 journal critique format.

• ✍️ How to Write a Critique

🔗 References

⭐ journal critique generator: benefits.

Are you tired of spending hours trying to compose a brilliant journal critique? Our online journal critique generator AI is here to save the day. Many benefits make our generator a favorite among students. Check them out!

• Intelligent . Our journal critique generator employs cutting-edge AI algorithms to help you prepare a well-informed and thoughtful paper.
• Time-saving . With our tool, you can produce a comprehensive critique in a few minutes, freeing up your time for other tasks.
• Inspiring . Our journal critique maker prompts your critical thinking, helping you compose more engaging and thought-provoking papers.
• Unlimited . There are no restrictions on how many critiques you can generate using our tool.
• Free . Anyone can use the journal critique generator without charge.

A journal critique assignment typically requires students to evaluate a scholarly publication. It involves assessing the article’s strengths and weaknesses and discussing its methodology, theoretical framework , and practical implications.

Writing this paper can be time-consuming, but not with our journal article critique generator! It makes this assignment more manageable by sparing you from having to analyze the article’s content. The tool ensures your critique is well-organized and meets academic requirements.

Most journal article critiques follow a traditional format: an introduction, summary, critique, and conclusion. Here’s a brief overview of each section:

• Introduction . Introduce the article by mentioning the author’s name, title, and central theme. Offer some context and present your thesis statement — the overarching idea of your analysis.
• Summary . Briefly retell the article’s main ideas, including the methodology, findings, and conclusions.
• Critique . Dig deeper into the publication by evaluating its strengths and weaknesses. Was the methodology sound? Did the evidence support the conclusions? Were there any gaps or biases? Offer your insights by answering these questions.
• Conclusion . Recap your overall assessment, reiterate key points, and give final thoughts or suggestions for further research.

✍️ How to Write a Critique of a Scholarly Journal Article

We understand that drafting a journal article critique can be troublesome. But with the help of a journal critique maker, you can always ensure excellent results. Still, if you want to hone your academic writing skills and analyze a scholarly article yourself, check out our step-by-step guide.

1. Choose an Article to Critique

Sometimes, your professor will assign you a particular article to critique. However, if you have to pick it yourself, consider these tips:

• Search through your university library or ask a trusted person to suggest an article. You can also check out databases like Google Scholar, PubMed, or JSTOR to access a vast catalog of academic publications.
• Carefully examine the article to decide if the subject interests you. Skim the table of contents, indexes, and introduction to get a sense of the paper’s content and approach.
• Read some portions of the text to assess if the vocabulary and style are clear to you. It’s crucial to understand the material to craft a strong critique.

2. Read and Evaluate the Article

Next, read your selected article attentively, preferably several times. Here are some valuable tips:

• Scan the whole text and underline any unfamiliar words. Try to determine the author’s main argument.
• Look up unknown words and read the scholarly work once more. This time, focus on the ideas supporting the main point and note the presented evidence and arguments.
• Summarize the article in your own words in several sentences. It will help you consolidate your comprehension of the text.
• Assess the article’s reliability by checking the author’s credentials, the publication where the paper appears, and any potential biases or conflicts of interest .
• Reread the article and pay attention to whether you’re convinced about the author’s main point. Evaluate the strong and weak sides of the arguments or findings.

3. Write Your Introduction

The opening paragraph of an article critique should introduce the article, including its title, author, and publication information. It should also concisely summarize the article’s key points and the author’s writing purpose. This section ends with a clear and focused thesis statement stating the central argument of your critique.

4. Summarize the Article

Every good critique needs a summary of the article it analyzes. This section can be part of the introduction or a separate paragraph. It aims to acquaint readers with the central arguments mentioned in the writing.

Here are some valuable tips on how to complete a summary for an article critique:

• Focus on the main points . Highlight the most crucial arguments and evidence offered by the author.
• Use your own words . Avoid simply restating sentences from the article. Summarize the content in your own words to show you truly understand it.
• Be objective . Present a balanced summary without injecting your biases or judgments.

5. Critique the Article

The body of your paper, the longest section, should back up your thesis. Here, you evaluate the article’s purpose, methodology, and scholarly contributions.

Feeling stuck on where to begin? No worries! Use these questions as a compass:

• What is the core message of the piece?
• What evidence does the author use to bolster their argument? Are these sources trustworthy and convincing?
• Was the author’s approach to the topic effective?
• Does the article bring novel insights to the existing knowledge on the issue?
• What are the author’s underlying assumptions or biases? How do they influence the argument?
• What are the implications and potential limitations of the findings or arguments?

6. Write Your Conclusion

The conclusion wraps up your critique and allows you to leave a strong impression on your audience. Here’s what it must include:

• Summary of key points . Briefly recap the article’s main arguments and findings.
• Restated thesis statement . Paraphrase your thesis , reminding your readers of the central argument you presented in the introduction.
• Evaluation of the article . Offer a final opinion on the paper, addressing its strengths, flaws, and impact.
• Suggestions for further research . Discuss areas for further investigation or the broader implications of the findings.

📌 Journal Critique Generator Free: FAQ

What does it mean to critique an article.

When you critique an article, you scrutinize its content, methodology, and arguments to assess its effectiveness. The aim is to figure out how credible and relevant the article is and what it adds to the study field. A critique provides a balanced review with some insightful feedback.

How to Title an Article Critique?

When picking a title for an article critique, ensure it is concise, informative, captivating, and sparks readers’ curiosity. Consider including the article’s title, author, and a hint of the critique’s focus. Here’s an example: “Miller’s ‘Student Stress and Life Satisfaction’: A Critique of the Research Design.”

How Long Should an Article Critique Be?

An article critique should be 2-3 double-spaced pages , equivalent to 500-900 words. In some cases, it may extend to 1000-2000 words. It’s crucial to double-check with your professor for specific requirements. They may have their preferred guidelines for the paper’s length.

Updated: Sep 13th, 2024

• Helpful Hints for Writing a Critique – Chesapeake College
• How to Write an Article Critique – Boston University
• A Guide for Critique of Research Articles – California State University
• How to Critique a Journal Article – The Center for Teaching and Learning at UIS
• Writing Critiques – UNC Writing Center

Have a language expert improve your writing

Check your paper for plagiarism in 10 minutes, generate your apa citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Using AI tools
• Best Summary Generator | Tools Tested & Reviewed

Best Summary Generator | Tools Tested & Reviewed

Published on May 6, 2024 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on May 21, 2024.

A summary generator (also called a summarizer , summarizing tool , or text summarizer ) is a kind of AI writing tool that automatically generates a short summary of a text. Many tools like this are available online, but what are the best options out there?

To find out, we tested 11 popular summary generators (all available free online, some with a premium version). We used two texts: a short news article and a longer academic journal article. We evaluated tools based on the clarity, accuracy, and concision of the summaries produced.

Our research indicates that the best summarizer available right now is the one offered by QuillBot . You can use it for free to summarize texts of up to 1,200 words—up to 6,000 with a premium subscription.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

1. quillbot , 2. resoomer , 3. scribbr , 4. sassbook , 5. paraphraser , 6. tldr this , 7. rephrase , 8. editpad , 9. summarizing tool , 10. smodin , 11. summarizer , research methodology, frequently asked questions about summarizers.

• Produces the clearest and most accurate summaries
• Summarizes text in a creative way, combining sentences
• Can summarize long texts (up to 6,000 words with premium)
• Options for length, format of summary, and keywords to focus on
• Highlights text that was used in the summary
• Summaries occasionally include errors
• Premium costs $19.95 a month (but gets you a variety of other tools)

We found QuillBot’s summarizer to be the most effective tool available right now. Its technology is more advanced and creative than any other tool’s. It offers a Key Sentences mode and a Paragraph mode; we found the Paragraph mode to be the most useful.

This mode effectively combined information from multiple sentences to produce a concise and clear summary. In the premium version, it was also able to summarize the longer testing text very effectively. The tool usefully highlights text from your input that was used in the summary, and it allows you to pick keywords to focus on if you want a summary of a specific theme.

We did notice some errors even in this tool: it occasionally misunderstood the meaning of the text or combined sentences in a way that was misleading. On one occasion, it seemed to introduce a typo (“collectiveists”) that wasn’t present in the original text.

Try QuillBot’s summarizer

Check for common mistakes

Use the best grammar checker available to check for common mistakes in your text.

Fix mistakes for free

• Relatively clear and accurate summaries
• Summarizes creatively, combining sentences
• A variety of modes and options
• Can summarize long texts (no word limit as far as we could tell)
• Confusing interface with irrelevant features
• Summaries of long texts are long-winded and split across multiple pages
• Only the premium mode ($10.57 a month) is useful

We found that Resoomer, though significantly less powerful than QuillBot, was stronger than other competitors—at least, if you pay for its premium mode. Like QuillBot, it generated creative summaries that combined information from different sentences in a relatively fluent way.

It was able to summarize the long text, but the summary it produced was overly long and spread across multiple pages we had to click between, limiting its usefulness. Resoomer offers a variety of modes, but they are presented in a rather confusing way and all of the free modes are very basic, just picking out sentences from the text rather than generating an original summary.

The mode we found useful was the “Assisted” mode, which is unfortunately only available with a premium subscription. We also didn’t find a use for the unusual “More words” button, which generates a continuation of the summary, seemingly not based on anything in the text.

Try Resoomer

• Produces clear and accurate summaries (powered by QuillBot)
• Can’t summarize long texts (limit of 600 words)

Scribbr’s summarizer is powered by QuillBot technology, which means that it offers the same modes, options, and quality-of-life features such as highlighting text used in the summary. And it produces similarly creative summaries: clear, concise, and fluently written.

The Scribbr summarizer does have one key limitation compared to the QuillBot tool: it cannot handle longer texts, since it has a limit of 600 words per input. The Scribbr tool is free, with no sign-up required and no premium version available right now.

Try Scribbr’s summarizer

• Relatively fluent and creative summaries
• Can summarize long texts (up to 22,000 characters with premium)
• Provides options for length and format of summary
• Very expensive subscription ($39 a month)
• Adds unnecessary verbiage (“Authors say that …”)
• Fairly cluttered interface
• Summaries sometimes misleading or hard to follow

We found that Sassbook provided relatively creative summaries, combining information from different sentences in a similar way to QuillBot or Resoomer. But we found the results less clear than in those tools.

Especially for the longer text, we saw that Sassbook summaries were not very coherently structured, presenting information in a somewhat random order that was hard to follow. We also noticed the tool’s tendency to insert unnecessary text such as “Authors say that …”

Moreover, the tool can only handle longer texts if you pay for a premium subscription, and we found the premium subscription to be unreasonably priced at $39 a month. Perhaps if you find the other tools included in the subscription useful, it could be worth the price. For the summarizer alone, it certainly isn’t worth it, and there are much better and cheaper options out there.

Try Sassbook’s summarizer

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

• Creative summaries with use of note-style language
• Summaries are usually relatively clear and accurate
• Can’t summarize long texts (no word limit stated, but didn’t work with our long text)
• Summaries are too long, and length controls make little difference
• Note-style summaries may not be what you want
• Some confusing moments in summaries

Paraphraser’s summarizer is a free tool with no premium options. It offers two modes, “Summarizer” and “AI Summarizer”; the difference isn’t clearly explained, but in our experience, AI Summarizer produced much better results. Summaries produced in this mode were creative but rough, using note-style language (e.g., omitting articles, using abbreviations) in a way we didn’t see in other tools.

Other options were available but made little difference to the output. Selecting different lengths of summary made very little difference in practice, and the alternative “Bullets” mode presented the same text as the “Paragraph” mode, but in bullet points. Because summary length couldn’t be effectively adjusted, summaries were always longer than we would have liked: over half the length of the full text.

There were also some confusing errors in the output: summaries would often end with a sentence like “Please shorten this text” that clearly shouldn’t be there. And although no word limit is mentioned, the tool didn’t work for our longer text in practice, summarizing only the first 1,000 words.

Try Paraphraser’s summarizer

• 10 free “AI” summaries to start with
• Can summarize the long text
• Just selects a few sentences from the text, producing no original summary
• Costs $4 a month for premium options (100 summaries a month)
• Premium options not noticeably better than free version
• Options (e.g., “short” or “detailed” modes) not noticeably different

The TLDR This tool seems to operate in a very basic way, just taking a few sentences from the text and presenting them in the order in which they originally appeared. It does not combine or paraphrase information in a creative way, even in its premium “AI” mode, which we found produced results nearly identical to those of the free “key sentences” mode.

Like some other tools, it can pick out keywords from the text. But the keywords selected are sometimes not very logical (e.g., “Percent Last Year”), and clicking on them just googles them rather than doing anything in the tool itself. We also did not notice any significant differences between the “short” and “detailed” modes.

Because of its very basic approach and the lack of noticeable differences between its modes, we don’t advise paying for TLDR This.

Try TLDR This

• Can’t summarize the long text (no word limit stated, but didn’t work in practice)
• No options for different lengths or formats of summary

Like TLDR This, Rephrase’s summarizer seemed to just select sentences from the text and present them in the same order again, without any creative recombination of information. In this case, the only way it modified the text was by putting the paragraph breaks at different points.

Rephrase’s tool is free, but, as mentioned, it’s extremely basic. It also lacks any options to change the length or format of the summary. As with other tools like this, the sentences it selects feel very random and often make no sense out of context, meaning the “summary” provided is effectively useless.

No word limit is indicated in the tool, but in practice we found that it could only summarize the first 1,500 words of our longer text. We also found the interface somewhat cluttered with ads.

Try Rephrase’s summarizer

• Can summarize the long text (stated limit of 10,000 words, seems to be 9,000 in reality and much lower in premium mode)
• Premium mode ($30 for a month) is indistinguishable from free mode apart from having a lower word limit and  fewer  options
• Messy interface

Editpad was one of the worst tools we tested: like Paraphraser’s tool, it offered a “Summarizer” mode (which seems identical to Paraphraser’s tool) and an “AI Summarizer” mode (only available with a $30 premium subscription in the case of Editpad).

But Editpad’s AI Summarizer mode seems worse than the free mode. The results in both modes are very basic, seemingly just selecting some sentences from the text and presenting them in the same order. The AI Summarizer mode differed in only two ways that we noticed: it could not summarize the long text (the free mode could), and it did not have any options regarding the length of the summary.

It’s not clear why Editpad charges money for a tool that seems to be much worse than the (already poor) tool they offer for free, but we strongly advise against paying for it.

Try Editpad’s summarizer

• Just selects sentences from the text and presents them in random order
• Summary of long text is very long

Summarizing Tool is a free tool that doesn’t really produce coherent summaries. Like many other tools, it just chooses some sentences from the text rather than generating an original summary. Even worse, though, it shuffles the sentences into a random order, making the text difficult to follow.

It’s not clear how this kind of “summary” could be useful, since it’s much harder to understand than if the sentences were presented in their original order.

Additionally, while the tool could summarize the long text, its summary in this case was also very long. What you get is essentially an incoherent jumble of ideas that is not even particularly short.

Try Summarizing Tool

• Can choose length of summary
• “Abstractive” and “extractive” modes not noticeably different
• Summary loads slowly
• $5 a month for premium version

Smodin’s summarizer seems to do effectively the same thing as Summarizing Tool: picking sentences from the text and presenting them out of order. In “abstractive” mode, we did notice it sometimes made slight changes to sentences, such as removing a word from the start, but it didn’t seem to properly combine information from different sentences.

One thing it did frequently do was to insert spelling errors (e.g., “religioosity”) and inappropriate synonyms (e.g., “humanity” instead of “personality”) into the text, which seems strange considering how little it otherwise changed in each sentence. In combination with the random order of the sentences, this results in a highly incoherent “summary.”

Paying $5 a month for the premium version raises the character limit from 30,000 to 50,000 and removes the daily limit of 30 entries. Given the poor quality of the tool, we don’t recommend paying.

Try Smodin’s summarizer

• Just gives you the same text back, but cut off halfway through—not a summary at all
• Unclear interface (100% length is actually the shortest)
• Not clear what the “Best Line” mode is for

Summarizer’s tool performed the worst out of those we tested. All it does is present the same text back to you, but cut off at a certain point (depending on the length of summary you select). No changes are made to any of the sentences.

Essentially, it’s a tool that deletes all but the first paragraph of a text for you. This is quite easy to do yourself with the backspace key, and it’s not likely to result in a “summary” of the text.

Try Summarizer

For our comparison, we selected 11 summarizing tools that show up prominently in search results. All the tools we tested can be used for free, but several of them have premium versions that you can use if you pay for a subscription. We tested the premium versions when available.

To compare the capabilities of the different tools, we used two testing texts, which are linked below:

• A short online news article (around 575 words)
• A longer academic journal article (around 3,500 words)

In each case, we pasted the entire main text of the article into the summarizer, leaving out things like footnotes, the article title, and details about the authors.

To judge the usefulness of the summaries generated, we looked at three qualitative factors:

• Concision:  Did the tool effectively condense the text into a quick summary?
• Clarity:  Is the summary easy to understand, or are sentences sometimes confusingly phrased or out of context?
• Accuracy:  Does it correctly express the key points of the text? Are any important details left out or stated incorrectly?

In the individual reviews, we also take into account details like user-friendliness, pricing, and limitations such as being unable to summarize the longer text.

Our research into the best summary generators (aka summarizers or summarizing tools) found that the best summarizer available is the one offered by QuillBot.

While many summarizers just pick out some sentences from the text, QuillBot generates original summaries that are creative, clear, accurate, and concise. It can summarize texts of up to 1,200 words for free, or up to 6,000 with a premium subscription.

Try the QuillBot summarizer for free

A summary is a short overview of the main points of an article or other source, written entirely in your own words. Want to make your life super easy? Try our free text summarizer today!

An abstract concisely explains all the key points of an academic text such as a thesis , dissertation or journal article. It should summarize the whole text, not just introduce it.

An abstract is a type of summary , but summaries are also written elsewhere in academic writing . For example, you might summarize a source in a paper , in a literature review , or as a standalone assignment.

All can be done within seconds with our free text summarizer .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2024, May 21). Best Summary Generator | Tools Tested & Reviewed. Scribbr. Retrieved September 9, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/ai-tools/best-summarizer/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, 10 best free grammar checkers | tested & reviewed, best paraphrasing tool | free & premium tools compared, best ai detector | free & premium tools tested, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Writing Tools

General Writing

• Paragraph Generator
• Article Rewriter
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Essay Writer
• AI Text Generator
• Sentence Expander
• Paragraph Rewriter
• Sentence Generator
• Plagiarism Remover

Assistant Writing

• Grammar Checker
• Online Proofreader
• Text & PDF Summarizer
• Spell Checker
• AI Translator
• Plagiarism Checker

Punctuation Checker

Creative Writing

• Prompt Generator
• AI Response Generator
• Hashtag Generator
• Slogan Generator
• Tweet (Thread) Generator
• Instagram Caption Generator
• Script Generator
• AI Lyrics Generator
• AI Story Generator

Find captivating Instagram captions for all moments.

Explore perfect email templates for every occasion.

Discover ideal quotes to elevate your book, speech, or essay.

Find the right words to voice your thoughts.

Learn all there is to know about ChatGPT.

Easily translate into 100+ languages.

Explore personal bios for hottest social media platforms.

Discover heartfelt love letters for your beloved.

Learn everything about AI writing and tools.

Discover the top alternatives to well-known AI tools.

Comparisons of popular AI writing tools.

Browse our curated lists of best alternatives to popular AI writers.

Article Summarizer

Summarize lengthy articles in a flash to save time and effort..

Click to upload your file here

Supported file types: DOC/DOCX/PDF/TXT.

Max file size is 10 MB.

URL to summarize

Summary Type

Bullet Points

Output Language

How to Summarize an Article with Our Article Summarizer

Summarizing an article is easy with HIX Writer’s online summarizing tool. Follow these simple steps to summarize any piece of text you have.

• Step 1: Copy and paste text to summarize into the input box
• Step 2: Choose the summary type, target audience, tone of voice, and language
• Step 3: Click “Generate” to get the summarized content in seconds.

Try Our Other Powerful AI Products

Bypass AI detection with 100% undetectable AI content

Create undetectable, plagiarism-free essays with accurate citations

Solve ANY homework problem with a smart AI. 99% accuracy guaranteed.

Browser Extension

The all-in-one ChatGPT copilot: rewrite, translate, summarize, Chat with PDF anywhere

2 Practical Ways to Summarize Articles with Our Article Summary Tool

Our article summarizer gives you two main options when summarizing text. You can summarize the text into:

Brief paragraphs

The tool can analyze your long piece of content and turn it into a short paragraph, while retaining all the key points. This helps you to read and understand the content faster.

The second option is to summarize the piece of content into concise and easy-to-digest bullet points. These bullet points make it easier for you to scan the content and find the information you’re looking for.

How HIX Writer’s Article Summarizer Can Save You Time and Effort

HIX Writer’s online summarizing tool saves your time and effort in multiple ways, including:

Learning new things: If you have found an article on a topic you love, you can use HIX Writer’s article summarizer to summarize the article. This way, you get to learn new information without spending hours reading.

Researching: Assuming you are doing academic research, you can use HIX Writer to summarize articles or journals related to the project or research you are doing. This helps you to understand the main arguments and conclusions that the authors made without breaking a sweat.

Writing : HIX Writer is a great writing assistant. You can summarize articles to get a clear understanding of their content and how they relate to your own writing. The result is better-researched content without having to read extensively.

Reviewing: You can use HIX Writer’s article summarizer to summarize an article you read in the past to recollect its main points or arguments.

Why Use Our Tool to Summarize Articles?

Here are some of the key reasons to choose HIX Writer’s article summarizer:

Summarize texts within seconds

In this fast-paced world, you may not always have the time to read long texts. Thankfully, HIX Writer’s article summarizer is here to help. You can summarize any piece of text within seconds to get the gist of the message without wasting valuable time.

Has unrivaled accuracy

The output generated by HIX Writer’s article summarizer is devoid of any errors, and a clear summarized version of the original text. If you are doing academic research, for example, you can rely on the summarized text as a reference for your work.

Summarize multiple texts without paying a dime

Unlike most article summarizing tools in the market, you are not required to pay anything to use HIX Writer’s article summarizer. You can summarize as many texts as you want at zero costs.

HIX Writer’s Article Summary Tool: Making Summarizing Articles a Breeze

Other Powerful AI Tools Besides Article Summarizer

Explain it to a 5th grader, continue writing, linkedin summary generator, story summarizer, real estate bio generator, professional bio generator, free spell checker, sentence shortener, are the summaries generated by hix writer’s online summarizing tool accurate and reliable.

Yes, all the summaries generated by HIX Writer’s article summarizer are accurate and reliable. The tool uses powerful algorithms that analyze the original content to come up with a summary that reflects the same meaning and message.

Can I use HIX Writer’s article summarizer for other reasons apart from academic and research projects?

Yes, our tool can be used for a wide range of things, including reviewing news articles, research, and general reading. As long as there is a piece of text that needs to be summarized, this tool will come in handy.

Is there a browser extension for this article summarizer tool?

Yes, if you don’t want to use the web version, there is an extension that you can use with your Google Chrome browser. This means you can summarize articles directly from the browser to save time. Click here to experience the extension for yourself.

Which's the best AI summary tool you should use?

HIX Writer's article summarizer is one of the best free AI summary generators you can trust. It allows you to summarize lengthy articles in bullet points or flowing paragraph format within seconds.

Try Our Powerful, All-in-one AI Writing Copilot Today!

Enhance your writing process with HIX Writer. Whether you're crafting fact-based articles, humanizing AI text, or rewriting, summarizing, and translating your content, HIX Writer provides the tools you need.

How the weather affects the pain of citizen scientists using a smartphone app

Structured summary.

A study analyzing daily data from 2658 patients over 15 months found significant yet modest relationships between pain and relative humidity, pressure, and wind speed, highlighting the potential of citizen-science experiments to collect large datasets on real-world populations to address long-standing health questions.

Key findings

The study found significant associations between pain and relative humidity , pressure, and wind speed , with relative humidity having the strongest association with pain.

The study found significant relationships between relative humidity , pressure, wind speed , and pain, with correlations remaining even when accounting for mood and physical activity .

The study estimates the odds ratio for a pain event in response to changes in weather variables, including temperature, wind speed , relative humidity , and pressure.

The odds of a pain event was 12% higher per one standard deviation increase in relative humidity (9 percentage points) ( OR 1.119 (1.084–1.154), compared to 4% lower for pressure ( OR 0.958 (0.930–0.989) and 4% higher for wind speed ( OR 1.041 (1.010–1.073) (11 mbar and 2 m s−1, respectively)

The analysis has demonstrated significant relationships between relative humidity , pressure, wind speed and pain, with correlations remaining even when accounting for mood and physical activity

The study aimed to investigate the relationship between weather and pain, overcoming limitations of prior weather–pain studies such as small populations, short follow-up, and assumptions about participant location and weather exposure.

The study used a smartphone app to collect daily data from participants, including pain symptoms, mood, physical activity , and weather data from nearby weather stations. The data was analyzed using a case-crossover design, comparing the weather on pain-event days to weather on control days within a risk set of a calendar month.

The study used a case-crossover design, where participants served as their own control, eliminating confounding by time-invariant factors. Participants were asked to collect daily symptoms for six months, and weather data were obtained by linking hourly smartphone GPS data to the nearest UK Met Office weather stations.

The study uses a conditional logistic regression model to estimate the odds ratio for a pain event in response to changes in weather variables. The model includes the preceding day’s pain score, mood, physical activity , and time spent outside as covariates.

The study found significant associations between pain and relative humidity , pressure, and wind speed , with relative humidity having the strongest association with pain. The odds of a pain event were higher than other variables.

The study retained 65% of participants for the first seven days and 44% for the first month, with over 2600 participants contributing to the analysis. The results showed significant relationships between weather variables and pain, with correlations remaining even when accounting for mood and physical activity .

The results of the study are presented as odds ratios for a pain event in response to changes in weather variables.

Conclusions

The study validated the perception of those who believe that their pain is associated with the weather, and understanding the relationship between weather and pain could allow pain forecasts and better understanding of pain mechanisms.

The study provides insights into the relationship between weather variables and pain events in patients with chronic pain .

Key concepts

Explore original text

Evaluate how this research stacks up

Research quality

2658 participants; large effect size; acknowledges limitations. This research has been cited 60 times.

Research comparison

Builds on existing methods and earlier findings 5 , while highlighting differences in outcomes with earlier work 4

Limitations

The study had several limitations, including potential biases due to participant selection, information bias, and subjective pain reporting. Additionally, the study's findings may not be generalizable to different climates, and the analysis assumed that all participants had the same weather–pain relationship.

The study has limitations, including the potential for bias and confounding variables.

Future work

Future studies could explore the relationship between weather and pain in different climates, and investigate the mechanisms underlying the weather–pain relationship.

Future studies can build on the findings of this study to further examine the relationship between weather variables and pain events in patients with chronic pain .

Practical applications

The study's findings could be used to develop pain forecasts, allowing patients to plan activities and take greater control of their lives.

The study has practical applications for the management of chronic pain , including the potential for weather-based forecasting of pain events.

Study Subjects

The study included 2658 participants with long-term pain conditions, predominantly female (83%), with a mean age of 51 years, and a range of different pain conditions, predominantly arthritis.

participants: 2658

Further description of engagement clusters is provided in Supplementary Table 2 and Supplementary Figs 1 –3. A total of 2658 participants had at least one hazard period matched to a control period in the same month ( Fig. 3 ) and were included in the final analysis . There were 9695 hazard periods included in the analysis for the final 2658 participants, matched to 81,727 control periods in 6431 participant-months

patients: 2658

Smartphones allow the opportunity to collect data to overcome these difficulties. Our study Cloudy with a Chance of Pain analysed daily data from 2658 patients collected over a 15-month period . The analysis demonstrated significant yet modest relationships between pain and relative humidity, pressure and wind speed, with correlations remaining even when accounting for mood and physical activity

After downloading the study app, participants completed an electronic consent form and a baseline questionnaire including demographic information (sex, year of birth, first half of postcode), anatomical site(s) of pain, underlying pain condition(s), baseline medication use, and beliefs about the extent to which weather influenced their pain on a scale of 0–10, including which weather condition(s) were thought to be most associated with pain

The data were analysed using a case-crossover design where, for each participant, exposure during days with a pain event (“hazard periods”) were compared to “control periods” without a pain event in the same month.23

The blue line represents the cumulative number of participants with a completed baseline questionnaire and at least one pain score submitted

Of the four weather variables, relative humidity had the strongest association with pain, and temperature the least, evidenced by the estimated relative importance of the variables and their standardized odds ratios (Table 1, Supplementary Table 4)

A first-order hidden Markov model was used to estimate the levels of engagement of participants by assuming three latent engagement states: high, low, and disengaged

Study Compliance

Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Manchester Research Ethics Committee (ref: ethics/15522) and from the NHS IRAS (ref: 23/NW/0716). Participants were required to provide electronic consent for study inclusion. Further details are available elsewhere.[ 13 , 14 ] Weather data Weather data were obtained by linking hourly smartphone GPS data to the nearest of 154 possible United Kingdom Met Office weather stations. Where GPS data were missing, we used significant location imputation. (For details, see supplement). Local hourly weather data were obtained from the Integrated Surface Database (ISD) of NOAA (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/isd), which includes hourly observations from UK Met Office weather stations.

W.G.D. has received consultancy fees from Bayer Pharmaceuticals and Google, unrelated to this study. B.J. and B.H. are co-founders of uMotif. All other authors declare no competing interests.

The study was funded by Versus Arthritis (new name for Arthritis Research UK) (grant reference 21225), with additional support from the Centre for Epidemiology (grants 21755 and 20380)

A.G. and A.M.V.C. are the recipients of Medical Research Council U.K. grants (MR/M022625/1 and MR/R013349/1)

H.L.P. is the recipient of the Ken Muirden Overseas Training Fellowship from the Arthritis Australia, an educational research grant funded by the Australian Rheumatology Association

A.B. is supported by a Medical Research Council doctoral training partnership (grant MR/N013751/1)

T.H. is supported by the Alan Turing Institute and the Royal Society (grant INF/R2/180067)

D.M.S. is partially supported by the Natural Environment Research Council U.K. (grants NE/I005234/1, NE/I026545/1, and NE/N003918/1)

R.S. is partially supported by the Alan Turing Institute (grant EP/N510129/1)

Original text

Front matter

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Patients with chronic pain commonly believe their pain is related to the weather. Scientific evidence to support their beliefs is inconclusive, in part due to difficulties in getting a large dataset of patients frequently recording their pain symptoms during a variety of weather conditions. Smartphones allow the opportunity to collect data to overcome these difficulties. Our study Cloudy with a Chance of Pain analysed daily data from 2658 patients collected over a 15-month period . The analysis demonstrated significant yet modest relationships between pain and relative humidity, pressure and wind speed, with correlations remaining even when accounting for mood and physical activity . This research highlights how citizen-science experiments can collect large datasets on real-world populations to address long-standing health questions. These results will act as a starting point for a future system for patients to better manage their health through pain forecasts .

Introduction

Weather has been thought to affect symptoms in patients with chronic disease since the time of Hippocrates over 2000 years ago.[ 1 ] Around three-quarters of people living with arthritis believe their pain is affected by the weather .[ 2 , 3 ] Many report their pain is made worse by the cold, rain , and low atmospheric pressure . Others report that their pain is made worse by warmth and high humidity. Despite much research examining the existence and nature of the weather–pain relationship,[ 4 ] there remains no scientific consensus . Studies have failed to reach consensus in part due to their small sample sizes or short durations (commonly fewer than 100 participants or one month or less); by considering a limited range of weather conditions; and heterogeneity in study design (e.g. the populations studied, methods for assessing pain, assumptions to determine the weather exposure, and statistical analysis techniques).[ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ] Resolving this question requires collection of high-quality symptom and weather data on large numbers of individuals. Such data also need to include other factors potentially linked to daily pain variation and weather , such as mood and amount of physical activity . Collecting this kind of multi-faceted data in large populations over long periods of time, however, has been difficult.

The increasing uptake of smartphones offers new and significant opportunities for health research.[ 12 ] Smartphones allow the integration of data collection into daily life using applications (apps). Furthermore, embedded technologies within the smartphones, such as the Global Positioning System ( GPS ), can be used to link the data collection to specific locations. We created Cloudy with a Chance of Pain,[ 13 , 14 ] a national United Kingdom smartphone study, to collect a large dataset to examine the relationship between local weather and daily pain in people living with long-term pain conditions.

The study app was downloaded by 13,207 users over the 12-month recruitment period ( Figs 1 and 2a) with recruitment from all 124 UK postcode areas. A total of 10,584 participants had complete baseline information and at least one pain entry, with 6850 (65%) participants remaining in the study beyond their first week and 4692 (44%) beyond their first month ( Fig. 2 b). Further description of engagement clusters is provided in Supplementary Table 2 and Supplementary Figs 1 –3. A total of 2658 participants had at least one hazard period matched to a control period in the same month ( Fig. 3 ) and were included in the final analysis. There were 9695 hazard periods included in the analysis for the final 2658 participants, matched to 81,727 control periods in 6431 participant-months. A total of 1235 participants contributed one month, and the remaining 1423 participants contributed 2–15 months.

User interface of the study app (uMotif, London). Each colored segment represents one of the ten data items. Participants report their symptoms on a five-point scale by dragging the segment from the center outwards

Recruitment and retention. a Cumulative recruitment and number of active participants through time. The blue line represents the cumulative number of participants with a completed baseline questionnaire and at least one pain score submitted. The red line represents the current number of active participants (i.e. those who have submitted their first but not yet their last pain score in the study period). b Retention through time. The graph represents the retention of active participants through time as a survival probability from the day of their recruitment. Participants were censored when they were no longer eligible for follow-up. Eligible follow-up time ranged from 90 days (for those recruited on 20 January 2017) to 456 days (for those recruited on 20 January 2016)

Example participant timeline of 21 days, showing participant-reported items (here, pain severity, mood, and exercise) and weather data (here, temperature and relative humidity ). Pain events with their associated hazard periods (dark grey) occur when pain severity increases by two or more ordinal categories between consecutive days (e.g. from Day 4 to Day 5). Control periods (light gray) occur on days that were eligible to be a pain event, but where pain did not increase by two or more ordinal categories. Days where there was no recorded pain on the preceding day , or where the preceding day’s pain was severe or very severe (and could thus not increase by two or more categories), were not eligible to be pain-event days or control days. The case-crossover analysis compared the weather on pain-event days to weather on control days within a risk set of a calendar month

The final cohort was active for a median of 165 days (interquartile range, IQR 84–245) with symptoms submitted on an average of 73% of all days. Cohort members were predominantly female (83%), had a mean age of 51 years (standard deviation 12.6), and had a range of different pain conditions, predominantly arthritis (Supplementary Table 1). The median number of weather stations associated with each participant during the course of their active data-collection period was 9 (IQR 4–14) with a maximum of 82 stations, indicating how mobile participants were during the course of the study and the importance of accounting for the weather at different locations over the course of the study. As an illustration of the structure of the data, the proportion of participants reporting a pain event was plotted as a heat map per calendar day for the study period ( Fig. 4 ), aligned with the average United Kingdom weather data for the same time period. On any given day during the study, about 1–6% of participants had a pain event. At the start of the study, most participants believed in an association between weather and their pain (median score 8 out of 10, IQR 6–9). The demographics, health conditions and baseline beliefs of the 2658 participants included in the analysis were representative of the 10,584 participants who downloaded the app and provided baseline information (Supplementary Table 2).

The proportion of eligible active participants reporting a pain event during the study period, aligned with average UK weather data from February 2016 to April 2017. Heat map colors indicate the percentage of participants reporting a pain event on that day , ranging from 1–6% participants. The denominator per day is the number of participants who reported their pain on the day of interest and the prior day, irrespective of the level of pain on the prior day and thus their eligibility for a pain event

The multivariable case-crossover analysis including the four state weather variables demonstrated that an increase in relative humidity was associated with a higher odds of a pain event with an OR of 1.139 (95% confidence interval 1.099–1.181) per 10 percentage point increase, as was an increase in wind speed with an OR of 1.02 (1.005–1.035) per 1 m s−1 increase (Table 1). The odds of a pain event was lower with an increase in atmospheric pressure with an OR of 0.962 (0.937–0.987) per 10-mbar increase. Temperature did not have a significant association with pain ( OR 0.996 (0.985–1.007) per 1 °C increase). The odds of a pain event was 12% higher per one standard deviation increase in relative humidity (9 percentage points) (OR 1.119 (1.084–1.154), compared to 4% lower for pressure (OR 0.958 (0.930–0.989) and 4% higher for wind speed (OR 1.041 (1.010–1.073) (11 mbar and 2 m s−1, respectively) . Of the four weather variables, relative humidity had the strongest association with pain , and temperature the least, evidenced by the estimated relative importance of the variables and their standardized odds ratios (Table 1, Supplementary Table 4). Similar effect sizes were seen when each variable was examined in univariable analyses . Precipitation was not associated with an increased odds of a pain event ( OR 0.996 (0.989–1.003) per 1 mm daily rainfall amount) (Supplementary Table 5). Exploratory analyses considered time spent outside by including an interaction term with temperature, relative humidity , and wind speed . Time spent outside did not have a significant interaction with relative humidity or wind speed , nor did it lead to significant associations for temperature when conducting analyses stratified by time spent outside (Supplementary Table 3). It thus was not included in the final model.

The model was then expanded to include mood and physical activity on the day of interest, included as binary variables (Table 1), resulting in a modest reduction in the point estimates for all weather variables. Mood was strongly and independently associated with pain events ( OR 4.083 (3.824–4.360) for low mood versus good mood), whereas there was no significant association with physical activity ( OR 0.939 (0.881–1.002) for high versus low activity).

This multivariable regression model output represents the effect of one weather variable while all else remains constant. In reality, a single weather variable rarely changes in isolation while others remain unchanged . To illustrate the composite effect of the weather variables on the odds of reporting pain, an OR was calculated for each day using the coefficients of our multivariable model and daily UK mean weather values. Figure 5 demonstrates there is significant variability in the odds of a pain event for any given value of each weather variable. For example, at a temperature of 8 °C, the odds of a pain event varied from around 0.8–1.2, depending on the other state variables in the weather that day.

Estimated odds of a painful day for all weather days experienced during the 15 months . Estimated odds of a painful day are plotted as the odds ratio for each day compared to the average weather day in this period (temperature = 9.3 °C, relative humidity = 83%, wind speed = 4 m s–1 and pressure = 1013 mbar). Estimated odds are calculated from the output of the multivariable regression analysis . The day associated with the highest estimated odds of a pain event had a temperature of 9 °C , relative humidity 88%, wind speed 9.5 m s–1 and pressure 988 mbar. The day associated with the lowest estimated odds of a pain event was when the temperature was 7 °C, relative humidity was 67%, wind speed 4.5 m s−1 and pressure 1030 mbar

Other factors such as day of the week (Supplementary Table 6), lagged weather values (Supplementary Table 7) and changes in weather variables from the previous day were tested. Mondays, Thursdays, and Saturdays (ORs 1.14, 1.14, and 1.29, respectively) had higher odds of pain compared to Sundays, but adjusting for the day of the week did not alter the effect of the four main weather variables . Except for relative humidity (1-day lag and 2-day lag), no significant associations were observed between lagged weather variables and pain events . Including change in weather from yesterday showed a minor effect of changing relative humidity ( OR 1.005 (1.001–1.009) per 10 percentage point increase), whereas the effects of today’s relative humidity and pressure remained unchanged (Supplementary Table 8). Stratification by disease led to a loss of statistical power and largely inconclusive results, although relative humidity appeared to have a stronger association with pain in patients with osteoarthritis (Supplementary Table 9, Supplementary Fig. 4 ). Stratification by the number of pain sites also showed no meaningful difference (Supplementary Table 10). After stratifying by participants’ prior beliefs about their weather–pain relationship, relative humidity remained associated with pain in all participants although the association with pressure was only seen in those with a strong prior belief (Supplementary Table 11).

This study has demonstrated that higher relative humidity and wind speed , and lower atmospheric pressure, were associated with increased pain severity in people with long-term pain conditions . The most significant contribution was from relative humidity . The effect of weather on pain was not fully explained by its day-to-day effect on mood or physical activity . The overall effect sizes, while statistically significant, were modest. For example, the ‘worst’ combination of weather variables would increase the odds of a pain event by just over 20% compared to an average day . Nonetheless, such an increased risk may be meaningful to people living with chronic pain .

In addition to investigating the weather–pain relationship, we successfully conducted a national smartphone study that delivered on the promise of how consumer technology can support health research.[ 12 , 15 ] This study recruited over 10,000 participants throughout the United Kingdom , sustained daily self-reported data over many months,[ 13 ] and showcased the value of passively collected GPS data. Prior large smartphone studies have retained only around one in ten participants for seven days or less.[ 16 , 17 ] In contrast, our study retained 65% of participants for the first seven days, and 44% for the first month, with over 2600 participants contributing to the analysis having provided data for many months of the study.[ 13 , 14 ] An important success factor was strong public involvement in early setup and piloting, as well as participants’ interest in weather as a possible pain trigger.[ 14 ] The study design has resolved problems of prior weather–pain studies such as small populations,[ 5 , 7 ] short follow-up,[ 3 , 8 ] surrogate pain outcomes,[ 11 ] the absence of possible causal pathway variables such as mood, and assumptions about where participants were located and thus the weather to which they were exposed.[ 18 , 19 ] Overcoming these obstacles produced a large dataset that allowed us to tease out subtle relationships between weather and pain .

There are potential limitations to this study. First, the reduction in participant numbers from over 10,000 with baseline data to the final 2658 participants with at least one within-month risk set raises questions about generalisability. Importantly, the characteristics of those included in the analysis were similar to the initial 10,000 participants, other than being slightly older (mean age 51 versus 48 years old). In a prior analysis, we showed that Cloudy participants were largely representative of a population reporting chronic-pain symptoms,[ 13 ] although proportionally fewer participants at both extremes of age were recruited. However, we would not expect middle-aged recruits to differ in their relationship between weather and pain from older or younger participants, and thus such selection factors would not invalidate our results. Second, the study was advertised to participants with a clear research question . It is possible that only people with a strong belief in a weather–pain relationship participated, generating an unrepresentative sample. However, the percentage of participants who believed in the weather –pain relationship was similar to prior studies,[ 20 ] and we did not see selective attrition of people who reported no weather –pain beliefs.[ 13 ] The within-person design would, regardless, mean that participants who drop out early would not introduce bias from time-invariant characteristics. Third, the lack of blinding raises possible information bias where observed weather could influence participants’ symptom reporting. Our baseline questionnaire demonstrated that rain and cold weather were the most common pre-existing beliefs. If a reporting bias were to exist, we would expect higher pain to be reported at times of colder weather . Our findings—including the absence of an association with either temperature or rainfall—cannot be explained by such a reporting bias. Fourth, pain reporting is subjective, meaning one participant’s “moderate” might equate to someone else’s “severe”. The within-person case-crossover analysis meant we compared moments when an individual’s score increased by a meaningful amount to a control period for that same person. Fifth, we chose to model the weather using daily averages. It is possible that other findings may be hidden if the association between weather and pain was with other metrics of weather , such as the daily maximum, minimum, or range, or even if the changes in weather on hourly time scales affect participants’ pain. Sixth, the findings from this United Kingdom study cannot necessarily be extrapolated to different climates where the weather is different. Seventh, our population-wide analysis assumed that all participants have the same weather –pain relationship. Different diseases may have different sensitivities to pain and, even within disease, participants may be affected differently. Our decision to use the whole chronic-pain population in our primary analysis means the overall associations with weather variables may be combinations of strong, weak and absent causal effects, thereby underestimating the most important associations. Notable differences were not seen after stratification by pain condition , although the power to detect any differences was reduced because of smaller sample sizes. Lastly, the inclusion of repeated events per person required us to consider within-subject dependence which, if not accounted for, would lead to bias.[ 21 ] Our outcome was based on changes in pain (a two or more category increase), which meant events rarely occurred on consecutive days , thereby ensuring a time gap between recurrent events and the avoidance of bias.

Understanding the relationship between weather and pain is important for several reasons . First, this study validates the perception of those who believe that their pain is associated with the weather . Second, given we can forecast the weather days in advance, understanding how weather relates to pain would allow pain forecasts . Patients could then plan activities and take greater control of their lives. Finally, understanding the relationship between weather and pain might also allow better understanding of the mechanisms for pain and thus allow the development of new and more effective interventions for those who suffer with pain .

In summary, our large national smartphone study has successfully supported the collection of daily symptoms and high-quality weather data , allowing examination of the relationship between weather and pain. The analysis has demonstrated significant relationships between relative humidity, pressure, wind speed and pain, with correlations remaining even when accounting for mood and physical activity .

Patient involvement has been important throughout the study , from inception to interpretation of the results. Co-author C.G. is a patient partner and co-applicant, while a patient and public involvement group of seven additional members has supported the study, meeting eight times in total. During the feasibility study,[ 14 ] patients positively influenced the wording and display of questions within the app. C.G. and other members of the Patient and Public Involvement Group were involved in media broadcasts at study launch and subsequent public engagement activities, explaining why the research question was important to them and relevant to patients with long-term pain conditions.[ 22 ] They have supported the interpretation of findings and the development of dissemination plans for the results, ensuring the results reach study participants, patient organizations and the general public.

We recruited participants through local and national media (television, radio, and press) and social media from 20 January 2016 to 20 January 2017. To participate in the study, participants needed to (i) be living with long-term (>[ 3 ] months) pain conditions, (ii) be aged 17 years or older, (iii) be living in the United Kingdom, and (iv) own an Android or Apple iOS smartphone. Interested participants were directed to the study website (www.cloudywithachanceofpain.com) where they could check their eligibility, learn about the study, and download the uMotif app ( Fig. 1 ). After downloading the study app, participants completed an electronic consent form and a baseline questionnaire including demographic information (sex, year of birth, first half of postcode), anatomical site(s) of pain, underlying pain condition(s), baseline medication use, and beliefs about the extent to which weather influenced their pain on a scale of 0–10, including which weather condition(s) were thought to be most associated with pain. Participants were then invited to collect daily symptoms for six months, or longer if willing. Each day, the app alerted participants to complete ten items at 6:24 p.m. ( Fig. 1 ). The ten items were pain severity, fatigue, morning stiffness, impact of pain, sleep quality, time spent outside, waking up feeling tired, physical activity , mood, and well-being. Each data item had five possible labeled ordinal responses. For example, in response to the question “How severe was your pain today?”, possible responses were “no pain”, “mild pain”, “moderate pain”, “severe pain” or “very severe pain”. The data were analysed using a case-crossover design where, for each participant, exposure during days with a pain event (“hazard periods”) were compared to “control periods” without a pain event in the same month.[ 23 ] Pain events were defined as a two-or-more category increase in pain from the preceding day, consistent with more stringent definitions of a clinically important difference[ 24 ] ( Fig. 3 ). Data collection ended on 20 April 2017.

Participants were included in the final cohort for analysis if they fulfilled the following criteria: (1) downloaded the app; (2) provided consent; (3) completed the baseline questionnaire; and (4) contributed at least one pain event and matched control period in the same month (see below). During exploratory analysis, it was apparent that people reported higher pain levels in the first ten days following recruitment (perhaps due to calibration or regression to the mean). Therefore, the first ten days were excluded from the formal analysis. However, even if the first ten days were included, they had a negligible effect on the results (Supplementary Table 12).

The total person-days in study was calculated for each participant as the number of days between their first and last day of entering pain data. The number of person-days on which a pain score was entered was summed per participant, presented as a proportion of the total person-days in study, and averaged across the population. The geographical distribution of recruitment was described as the number of UK postcode areas represented (out of a maximum of 124).[ 25 ] The movement of participants during the study was described as the median number of weather stations associated with each participant during their data-collection period.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Manchester Research Ethics Committee (ref: ethics/15522) and from the NHS IRAS (ref: 23/NW/0716). Participants were required to provide electronic consent for study inclusion. Further details are available elsewhere.[ 13 , 14 ]

Weather data were obtained by linking hourly smartphone GPS data to the nearest of 154 possible United Kingdom Met Office weather stations. Where GPS data were missing, we used significant location imputation. (For details, see supplement). Local hourly weather data were obtained from the Integrated Surface Database ( ISD ) of NOAA (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/isd), which includes hourly observations from UK Met Office weather stations.

Given the latitude–longitude coordinates of a participant location, the haversine distance to every Met Office weather station was calculated. The nearest station to the given location was selected, conditional on the distance being less than 100 km and the station having four weather variables (temperature, pressure, wind speed , and dewpoint temperature) available at that time. If all stations with the required weather data exceeded the maximum distance (100 km), the location was left unlinked and the observation was excluded from the analysis.

The significant location imputation approach for handling missing hourly GPS data had three stages.[ 26 ] First, the participant’s observed location data were ordered by the frequency that the locations were visited. Second, the locations were spatially clustered using Hartigan’s Leader Algorithm[ 27 ] with a threshold of 0.5 km. Third, missing locations during weekdays were replaced by the centroid of the participant’s most visited cluster for weekdays and missing locations during weekends were replaced by centroid of the participant’s most visited cluster for weekends.

Recruitment and duration of follow-up were presented as a graph of cumulative recruitment and active participants, with participation ending at the last symptom entry. Retention in the study was also presented as a survival probability against time since recruitment, with participants censored when they were no longer eligible for follow-up. Eligible follow-up time ranged from 90 days (for those recruited on 20 January 2017) to 456 days (for those recruited on 20 January 2016). Engagement of participants was further described through clustering of engagement states, which has been described in detail elsewhere.[ 13 ] Following recruitment, individuals were labeled as engaged if they reported any of the ten symptoms on a given day. A first-order hidden Markov model was used to estimate the levels of engagement of participants by assuming three latent engagement states: high, low, and disengaged. Clusters were defined according to different probabilities of transitioning between high engagement, low engagement and disengagement during the study. Retention of active participants was also presented stratified by engagement cluster, and in the subset of participants who contributed to the final analysis.

Days without pain events were only control periods if they were eligible to have a two-or-more category increase (i.e. the preceding day’s pain was lower than “severe”), thus fulfilling the exchangeability assumption for the case-crossover study design.[ 28 ] With this design, participants serve as their own control, eliminating confounding by time-invariant factors. Each month per participant with at least one hazard and one control period formed a risk set. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio ( OR ) for a pain event for four state weather variables (temperature, relative humidity , pressure, and wind speed ). The condition logistic regression model was implemented with the assumption that the possible recurrent events (hazard periods) within a person are independent conditional on the subject-specific variables and other observed time-varying covariates. Further, we make sure that there is no overlap between case and control periods. Our assumption is reasonable given the time gap between subsequent events.

Each weather variable was included in univariable models and then all four were included in a multivariable analysis. Each weather variable was represented as a daily average per participant for the hazard or control period, with results presented as an OR for a pain event in response to a one-unit increase for temperature and wind speed (°C and meter per second, respectively) or a ten-unit increase for relative humidity and pressure (percentage points and millibar, respectively). Standardized odds ratios of each weather variable were also calculated. The relative importance of the four state weather variables was estimated by summing the Akaike weights.[ 29 ] In all models, the preceding day’s pain score was included as it influenced the likelihood of a pain event the following day. The model was expanded to include mood and physical activity on the day of interest, included as binary variables. Time spent outside was considered as a possible effect modifier by including an interaction term with temperature, relative humidity , and wind speed . A directed acyclic graph is included in the supplementary material (Supplementary Fig. 5 ).

Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the effect of precipitation, day of the week, possible lag between weather and pain, change in weather from the day before the hazard or control day, disease type, sites of pain (single versus multiple sites) and prior beliefs in the weather–pain relationship. Respecting patients’ perspectives, we decided our primary analysis would focus on the whole chronic-pain population and our analyses of disease-specific associations would be secondary . We also re-ran the analysis including the first 10 days.

Estimated odds ratio for a pain event per day compared to the average weather day were calculated using the following equation:

Timmermans, E. J. et al Self-perceived weather sensitivity and joint pain in older people with osteoarthritis in six European countries: Results from the European Project on OSteoArthritis ( EPOSA ). BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-66 (2014).

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the contributions of our patient and public involvement group throughout the study: Carolyn Gamble, Karen Staniland, Shanali Perara, Simon Stones, Rebecca Parris, Annmarie Lewis, Dorothy Slater and Susan Moore. The study app and website was provided by uMotif Limited (London, UK) . The unique flower-like ‘motif’ symptom tracking interface is owned by uMotif Limited and protected through EU Design Registrations and a U.S Design Patent . We gratefully acknowledge the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Climatic Data Center Integrated Surface Database (https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/isd) for providing the weather data used in this study. The study was funded by Versus Arthritis (new name for Arthritis Research UK) (grant reference 21225), with additional support from the Centre for Epidemiology (grants 21755 and 20380). A.G. and A.M.V.C. are the recipients of Medical Research Council U.K. grants (MR/M022625/1 and MR/R013349/1). H.L.P. is the recipient of the Ken Muirden Overseas Training Fellowship from the Arthritis Australia, an educational research grant funded by the Australian Rheumatology Association. A.B. is supported by a Medical Research Council doctoral training partnership (grant MR/N013751/1). T.H. is supported by the Alan Turing Institute and the Royal Society (grant INF/R2/180067). D.M.S. is partially supported by the Natural Environment Research Council U.K. (grants NE/I005234/1, NE/I026545/1, and NE/N003918/1). R.S. is partially supported by the Alan Turing Institute (grant EP/N510129/1).

W.G.D. designed the study, acquired funding, supervised and participated in data-collection and content analysis, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. A.L.B., B.B.Y. and H.L.P. conducted the analysis. L.C. coordinated project management and participant support. A.G., T.E.L., A.V.M.C., M.M., R.S., T.H., M.L., D.M.S., J.C.S. and J.McB. contributed to analysis plans and supervised the analysis. B.H., B.J., J.A., C.G., C.S., D.M.S., J.C.S. and J.McB. contributed to study design. C.S. led qualitative research in the feasibility study and led patient and public involvement. All authors critically reviewed manuscript drafts and approved the final version of the manuscript. W.G.D. is responsible for the overall content as guarantor, and attests that all listed authors meet authorship criteria and that no others meeting the criteria have been omitted.

Correspondence to William G. Dixon.

Competing interests

Supplementary information.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: References

2. Hagglund, K. J. et al Weather, beliefs about weather, and disease severity among patients with fibromyalgia . Arthritis Rheum. 7, 130–135 (1994).

3. Timmermans, E. J. et al Self-perceived weather sensitivity and joint pain in older people with osteoarthritis in six European countries: Results from the European Project on OSteoArthritis ( EPOSA ). BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-66 (2014).

6. Brennan, S. A. et al Influence of weather variables on pain severity in end-stage osteoarthritis . Int. Orthop. 36, 643–646 (2012).

7. Smedslund, G. et al Does the weather really matter? A cohort study of influences of weather and solar conditions on daily variations of joint pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis . Arthritis Rheum. 61, 1243–1247 (2009).

8. Bossema, E. R. et al Influence of weather on daily symptoms of pain and fatigue in female patients with fibromyalgia : a multilevel regression analysis. Arthritis Care Res. (Hoboken) 65, 1019–1025 (2013).

9. Duong, V. et al Does weather affect daily pain intensity levels in patients with acute low back pain? A prospective cohort study . Rheumatol. Int. 36, 679–684 (2016).

11. Jena, A. B. et al Association between rainfall and diagnoses of joint or back pain: retrospective claims analysis. BMJ 359, j5326 (2017).

13. Druce, K. L. et al Recruitment and ongoing engagement in a UK smartphone study examining the association between weather and pain: Cohort study. JMIR mHealth uHealth 5, e168 (2017).

14. Reade, S. et al Cloudy with a Chance of Pain: Engagement and subsequent attrition of daily data entry in a smartphone pilot study tracking weather, disease severity, and physical activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis . JMIR mHealth uHealth 5, e37 (2017).

15. Santos-Lozano, A. et al mHealth and the legacy of John Snow. Lancet 391, 1479–1480 (2018).

16. Bot, B. M. et al The mPower study, Parkinson disease mobile data collected using ResearchKit. Sci. Data 3, 160011 (2016).

17. McConnell, M. V. et al Feasibility of obtaining measures of lifestyle from a smartphone app . JAMA Cardiol. 2, 67 (2017).

18. Smedslund, G. et al Do weather changes influence pain levels in women with fibromyalgia , and can psychosocial variables moderate these influences? Int. J. Biometeorol. 58, 1451–1457 (2014).

19. Beilken, K. et al Acute low back pain? Do not blame the weather—A case-crossover study. Pain. Med. 18, pnw[126] (2016).

24. Olsen, M. F. et al Pain relief that matters to patients: systematic review of empirical studies assessing the minimum clinically important difference in acute pain. BMC Med. 15, 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0775-3 (2017).

1. Hippocrates. On Airs, Waters and Places. http://classics.mit.edu//Hippocrates/airwatpl.html.

2. Hagglund, K. J. et al. Weather, beliefs about weather, and disease severity among patients with fibromyalgia. Arthritis Rheum. 7, 130–135 (1994).

3. Timmermans, E. J. et al. Self-perceived weather sensitivity and joint pain in older people with osteoarthritis in six European countries: Results from the European Project on OSteoArthritis (EPOSA). BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-66 (2014).

4. Smedslund, G. & Hagen, K. B. Does rain really cause pain? A systematic review of the associations between weather factors and severity of pain in people with rheumatoid arthritis. Eur. J. Pain. 15, 5–10 (2011).

5. Aikman, H. The association between arthritis and the weather. Int. J. Biometeorol. 40, 192–199 (1997).

6. Brennan, S. A. et al. Influence of weather variables on pain severity in end-stage osteoarthritis. Int. Orthop. 36, 643–646 (2012).

7. Smedslund, G. et al. Does the weather really matter? A cohort study of influences of weather and solar conditions on daily variations of joint pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 61, 1243–1247 (2009).

8. Bossema, E. R. et al. Influence of weather on daily symptoms of pain and fatigue in female patients with fibromyalgia: a multilevel regression analysis. Arthritis Care Res. (Hoboken) 65, 1019–1025 (2013).

9. Duong, V. et al. Does weather affect daily pain intensity levels in patients with acute low back pain? A prospective cohort study. Rheumatol. Int. 36, 679–684 (2016).

10. Guedj, D. & Weinberger, A. Effect of weather conditions on rheumatic patients. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 49, 158–159 (1990).

11. Jena, A. B. et al. Association between rainfall and diagnoses of joint or back pain: retrospective claims analysis. BMJ 359, j5326 (2017).

12. Hayden, E. C. Mobile-phone health apps deliver data bounty. Nature 531, 422–423 (2016).

13. Druce, K. L. et al. Recruitment and ongoing engagement in a UK smartphone study examining the association between weather and pain: Cohort study. JMIR mHealth uHealth 5, e168 (2017).

14. Reade, S. et al. Cloudy with a Chance of Pain: Engagement and subsequent attrition of daily data entry in a smartphone pilot study tracking weather, disease severity, and physical activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. JMIR mHealth uHealth 5, e37 (2017).

15. Santos-Lozano, A. et al. mHealth and the legacy of John Snow. Lancet 391, 1479–1480 (2018).

16. Bot, B. M. et al. The mPower study, Parkinson disease mobile data collected using ResearchKit. Sci. Data 3, 160011 (2016).

17. McConnell, M. V. et al. Feasibility of obtaining measures of lifestyle from a smartphone app. JAMA Cardiol. 2, 67 (2017).

18. Smedslund, G. et al. Do weather changes influence pain levels in women with fibromyalgia, and can psychosocial variables moderate these influences? Int. J. Biometeorol. 58, 1451–1457 (2014).

19. Beilken, K. et al. Acute low back pain? Do not blame the weather—A case-crossover study. Pain. Med. 18, pnw126 (2016).

20. Jamison, R. N., Anderson, K. O. & Slater, M. A. Weather changes and pain: perceived influence of local climate on pain complaint in chronic pain patients. Pain 61, 309–315 (1995).

21. Luo, X. & Sorock, G. S. Analysis of recurrent event data under the case-crossover design with applications to elderly falls. Stat. Med. 27, 2890–2901 (2008).

22. Cloudy with a Chance of Pain on BBC North West Tonight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUdtKGr49GY. Accessed 14 Oct 2019 (2016).

23. Maclure, M. The case-crossover design: a method for studying transient effects on the risk of acute events. Am. J. Epidemiol. 133, 144–153 (1991).

24. Olsen, M. F. et al. Pain relief that matters to patients: systematic review of empirical studies assessing the minimum clinically important difference in acute pain. BMC Med. 15, 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0775-3 (2017).

25. BPH postcodes. A brief guide to UK postcodes. https://www.bph-postcodes.co.uk/guidetopc.cgi (2018).

26. Isaacman, S., Becker, R., Martonosi, M., Rowland, J., & Varshavsky, A. Identifying important places in people’s lives from cellular network data sibren. Proc. of 9th Int. Conf. Pervasive Comput. 1–18 (2011).

27. Hartigan, J. A. Clustering Algorithms. (Wiley, New York, 1975).

28. Mittleman, M. A. & Mostofsky, E. Exchangeability in the case-crossover design. Int. J. Epidemiol. 43, 1645–1655 (2014).

29. Burnham, K. P., Anderson, D. R. Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003).

30. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing, https://www.r-project.org (2018).

Top 10 Best AI Tools for Literature Review (Free + Paid)

Ayush Chaturvedi

16 min read

Best AI Tools for Literature Review at a Glance 

Elephas pricing , elephas reviews, research rabbit key features:, research rabbit pricing , research rabbit , semantic scholar key features:, semantic scholar pricing , semantic scholar reviews , r discovery key features , r discovery pricing , r discovery reviews , mendeley key features:, mendeley pricing , mendeley reviews , scholarcy key features:, scholarcy pricing , scholarcy reviews , rayyan key features:, rayaan pricing , rayaan reviews , consensus key features:, consensus pricing , consensus reviews , unpaywall key features:, unpaywall pricing , unpaywall reviews , lateral key features:, lateral pricing , lateral reviews, what is a literature ai tool , benefits of using ai tools for literature review , how did we pick the best ai tools for literature review, conclusion , 1. what is the best ai tool for literature review, 2. are ai tools for literature review suitable for all types of research , 3. are there any limitations to using ai tools for literature review.

AI tools are revolutionizing the literature review process, offering researchers a powerful alternative to manual searches. These tools can rapidly analyze vast amounts of data, identifying relevant studies and key information with precision and efficiency. 

By streamlining the research process, AI-powered literature review tools save time and reduce frustration, allowing researchers to focus on analysis and interpretation.

This article examines the top AI tools for literature review, evaluating both free and paid options. 

We'll explore how these tools can enhance your research workflow and help you conduct more comprehensive literature reviews.

So let's get started.

Elephas: Best for comprehensive AI-powered literature reviews and writing.

Research Rabbit: Best for organizing and discovering academic papers.

Semantic Scholar: Best for personalised, context-aware academic searches.

R Discovery: Best for personalized research feeds and multilingual access.

Mendeley: Best for reference management and collaborative research.

Scholarcy: Best for generating concise academic summaries.

Rayyan: Best for systematic literature reviews with collaboration.

Consensus: Best for finding evidence-based answers quickly.

Unpaywall: Best for accessing open-access scholarly articles.

Lateral: Best for organizing and analyzing research documents

Top 10 Best AI Tools for Literature Review

​ 1. Elephas 

​ Elephas is the best AI tool for literature review, designed to revolutionize your writing and research experience. With its robust suite of features, Elephas ensures that every aspect of your writing process is covered. From its offline capabilities, which keep your data secure, to the ability to integrate multiple AI models like OpenAI, Claude, and Gemini, Elephas offers unparalleled versatility. 

The Super Brain feature takes it a step further by indexing YouTube videos and web pages, allowing you to store and access valuable research material easily. Whether you need to generate content, fix grammar, or create engaging replies, Elephas has the tools to enhance your productivity and creativity.

Key Features:

Multiple AI Providers: Experiment with various writing styles and voices from OpenAI, Claude, Gemini, and Groq.

Offline Functionality: Write with confidence using local LLms that ensure your data is never shared or used for external training.

Web Search: Seamlessly search the web and incorporate relevant information into your writing.

Super Brain: Index YouTube videos and web pages, store them for future use, and retrieve content easily for in-depth research.

Rewrite Modes: Choose from Zinsser, Friendly, Professional, and Viral modes to tailor your writing style to any need.

Smart Write: Generate high-quality content quickly with just a few prompts or keywords.

Continue Writing: Overcome writer's block by letting Elephas continue your text based on the context you provide.

Personalized Tones: Train Elephas to match your unique writing voice and style for a more personalized touch.

Many users have shared how Elephas has transformed their daily workflow, making it an essential tool they can’t live without. One user mentioned that Elephas is incredibly addictive, boosting productivity by 10x and ensuring their emails always look great. ​

Another long-time user praised the app for lasting through the years and highlighted the "brains" feature, which speeds up content creation, programming, and editing. 

With Elephas, users experience unmatched efficiency and quality, making it the best tool for anyone looking to enhance their productivity and content creation.

2. Research Rabbit  

Research Rabbit is a versatile AI-powered tool designed to streamline the process of finding, managing, and analyzing research papers. As one of the best AI tools for literature review, it offers a user-friendly platform for anyone to access academic publications. 

After registering, users can search for research articles by author, topic, or keyword, and organize their findings in a personalized library. This tool is dedicated to enhancing scholarly work by supporting every stage of research, from discovery to collaboration. 

AI-driven search engine: It has AI search engines that can find and index relevant academic papers from across the web.

Customizable collections: It has already built in collections for organizing and managing research articles in a way that suits your specific needs and preferences.

User-friendly interface: It is designed for seamless navigation and an intuitive research management experience.

Broad search criteria: It includes detailed filters for author, topic, and keyword to refine your research findings.

Free access: It has all features for free, providing a cost-effective solution for research management.

Free to use 

We could not find any public reviews on the tool, so we advise users to be cautious while using the tool.

3. Semantic Scholar

Semantic Scholar is an advanced AI tool designed to enhance your literature review process by providing in-depth, context-aware search results. Ideal for researchers across various disciplines, it simplifies the search for academic papers, helping users navigate through over 200 million publications efficiently. 

By understanding the content and context of scientific articles, Semantic Scholar delivers personalized search outcomes, making it an invaluable resource for accelerating your research efforts. As one of the Best AI Tools for Literature Review, it stands out for its ability to filter and present the most relevant literature based on your specific needs.

Speeds up literature searches: Delivers context-rich results that save time and streamline the research process.

Customized search outcomes: Provides personalized results by deeply understanding the content and context of academic articles.

Versatile academic support: Accommodates a wide range of disciplines, enhancing its utility across different research areas.

Extensive database access: Offers a comprehensive database of over 200 million papers, ensuring broad coverage of research topics.

Enhanced research efficiency: Utilizes advanced AI to drive personalized search capabilities, improving overall research productivity.

4. R Discovery 

R Discovery is a powerful tool designed to enhance the research discovery process for students and researchers. With access to over 250 million research papers, it provides personalized reading feeds customized to your specific interests, ensuring you stay updated with the latest research in your field. 

The platform allows you to create and manage multiple reading lists, offers multilingual and full-text audio features for enhanced accessibility, and sends smart research alerts to keep your research organized. 

Personalized Research Feeds: R Discovery curates a customized reading list based on your interests, ensuring you stay up-to-date with the latest research.

Multiple Reading Lists: Organize your research with separate reading lists for different projects.

Multilingual & Full-Text Audio: Access research in over 30 languages, including audio versions for enhanced comprehension.

Smart Research Alerts: Receive targeted notifications about relevant research without being overwhelmed.

Integration with Reference Managers: Seamlessly sync your library with tools other research tools. 

Paid Plan stats from 2.29$/month 

5. Mendeley

Mendeley is a versatile reference management software, ideal for researchers, academics, and students involved in literature reviews. As one of the best AI tools for literature review, it helps users organize and manage their references efficiently, making research more streamlined. Mendeley also enables users to annotate PDFs, collaborate with others, and discover relevant literature, ensuring a comprehensive research experience.

Reference Management: Easily organize, store, and search through all your references from a single, centralized library, simplifying literature management.

PDF Viewing and Annotation: Open PDFs directly within Mendeley’s viewer, where you can add highlights and detailed notes, all stored for easy access.

Collaboration: Share references and annotated documents with research teams by creating private groups, enhancing collaboration and teamwork.

Literature Discovery: Import references from external sources and use Mendeley’s network to find and share key research papers with ease.

Citation Generation: Effortlessly generate accurate citations and bibliographies in multiple styles using the Mendeley Cite add-in for Microsoft Word.

Paid Plan starts from $4.99/month

Several users have expressed disappointment with Mendeley, noting that it has become increasingly frustrating to use. One user mentioned that the tool has too many flaws, requiring constant log-ins and failing to save passwords, making it unbearable. 

Another user shared that Mendeley is now a pain to use, with issues like the Word plug-in needing constant reinstallation, corrupted passwords, and disappearing or duplicated references.

6. Scholarcy

Scholarcy is a powerful AI-driven tool that simplifies the literature review process by generating concise summaries from academic papers. Designed to assist researchers, students, and academics, it quickly extracts key information, making it easier to evaluate and understand complex research. Scholarcy stands out as one of the Best AI Tools for Literature Review, ensuring efficient management of vast academic content.

Flashcard Summaries: Quickly grasp the main points of research papers with interactive flashcards that provide a concise, easy-to-read overview of the content.

Smart Highlighting: Easily identify factual statements and research findings with color-coded highlights that guide you to the most critical sections of the text.

Full-Text Access: Directly access full-text articles and cited papers through convenient links, streamlining your literature review process.

Literature Discovery: Efficiently discover and screen relevant literature with detailed synopses and highlights, helping you absorb key points in minutes.

Reference Management Integration: Seamlessly export flashcard summaries and key highlights to reference management tools like Zotero for organized and efficient citation management.

A user expressed dissatisfaction with Scholarcy, describing it as offering "no value added." The review highlighted concerns that Scholarcy essentially copies and pastes sections of articles or chapters and misleadingly labels it as "AI summarizing." 

The user also noted that the quality of the service dropped significantly after their free subscription expired, and they experienced issues with the interface being glitchy. The review strongly advises against paying for this service.

Rayyan is a powerful AI-driven app designed to streamline the systematic literature review process. It helps researchers quickly sift through vast amounts of research by enabling efficient reference management, de-duplication, screening, and organization. 

With Rayyan, users can import references from diverse sources, apply inclusion and exclusion criteria, assign labels, and export data for detailed analysis. The tool also supports collaboration among remote teams, making it an excellent choice for students, librarians, and researchers globally.

Collaborative Reviews: Seamlessly collaborate with distributed teams from anywhere using Rayyan’s intuitive mobile app.

Efficient Reference Management: Quickly import, de-duplicate, and organize your research references to save time and reduce errors.

Customizable Criteria: Easily apply and adjust inclusion and exclusion criteria to fit your specific review needs.

Advanced Analytics: Export your data for in-depth analysis and generate comprehensive reports to support your findings.

Priority Support: Benefit from dedicated training and VIP support to enhance your productivity and overcome challenges efficiently.

Paid Plan starts from $8.33/month

8. Consensus 

Consensus AI is a cutting-edge search engine designed to help you quickly find evidence-based answers from scientific research. It uses artificial intelligence to extract and summarize findings from peer-reviewed studies , providing a fast and efficient way to access reliable information. 

Consensus allows users to refine their searches, explore various research topics, and save time by delivering concise answers and full-text access to relevant papers. For academic research, Consensus AI is among the Best AI Tools for Literature Review due to its ability to synthesize and present information clearly and accurately.

AI-Powered Insights: Extracts and synthesizes findings from over 200 million scholarly documents.

Advanced Search Capabilities: Answers direct questions and explores relationships between concepts.

Consensus Meter: Provides a summary of agreement levels among multiple studies.

ChatGPT Integration: Access scientific research directly within the ChatGPT interface. ​

Customizable Searches: Offers tools to refine searches and explore more options based on research needs.

Paid Plan starts from $8.99/month

We couldn’t find any trustworthy reviews available on the internet for the Consensus. We advise users to use the tool with caution.

9. Unpaywall

Unpaywall is a free tool that aims to make scholarly research more accessible by providing open access to a vast collection of academic articles. It is integrated with major databases like Scopus and Web of Science, searching over 50,000 publishers and repositories globally. 

Users can find free, full-text versions of articles using Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs), making Unpaywall a vital resource for researchers seeking literature without barriers. This makes it one of the Best AI Tools for Literature Review.

Simple Query Tool: Allows users to quickly determine if an open access version of a specific list of articles, identified by DOIs, is available in the Unpaywall database.

Browser Extension: Automatically searches for and highlights legally available, free versions of scholarly articles as you browse , providing instant access to full texts.

Extensive Database: Offers access to a comprehensive index of over 20 million free, legal full-text PDFs, ensuring that users can find a wide range of open access literature.

Global Integration: Seamlessly integrates with major academic databases like Dimensions, Scopus, and Web of Science, enhancing the reach and effectiveness of your literature search.

API Access: Provides flexible data retrieval options, including REST API, R API Wrapper, or full dataset download, catering to various research and data management needs.

10. Lateral

Lateral is one of the Best AI Tools for Literature Review, designed to enhance your academic research process. This AI-powered app helps streamline your workflow by organizing, searching, and saving information from various research papers. 

With Lateral, you can efficiently analyze key concepts, relationships, and trends across your documents. The tool supports literature reviews by enabling you to manage sources and citations effortlessly, making research and paper writing much faster and easier.

Auto-Generated Table: Keeps an organized overview of all your research findings and references.

AI-Powered Concepts: Suggests relevant text across all your papers based on named concepts.

Super Search: Allows searching across all papers at once with highlighted similar results.

Smart PDF Reader: Facilitates reading and highlighting directly in the browser for better connection discovery.

Powerful OCR: Converts text from scanned PDFs into searchable and highlightable formats.

Paid Plans starts at $11.02/month

Literature AI tools are designed to significantly speed up the process of conducting literature research, helping researchers, students, and professionals save valuable time. These tools use advanced algorithms to automate various tasks, making literature research more efficient. Here’s an overview of the different types of literature AI tools available:

Literature Summary Tools: Quickly condense lengthy texts into concise summaries, making it easier to grasp key points.

Literature Research Tools: Assist in finding and organizing relevant research papers and articles.

Literature Review Tools: Provide detailed analyses and critiques of existing literature to support comprehensive reviews.

Writing Assistance Tools: Aid in drafting and editing texts, improving writing quality and coherence.

However, there are some tools such as Elephas which have all the features combined and it is perfect for researchers. It can summarize, review, write, assist, and many. ​

Using AI tools for literature review brings significant advantages, making the entire process smoother and more effective. These tools are particularly valuable for researchers, students, and anyone engaged in extensive literature work.

Here are some key benefits of these tools:

Time Efficiency: AI tools cut down the time needed to gather and summarize information. This can make research tasks much faster, almost halving the time you spend on literature review.

Accuracy: With AI handling data analysis, you can trust that the summaries and insights are precise, reducing the likelihood of mistakes.

Better Organization: AI tools help keep research materials neatly organized. This makes it easier to track and retrieve relevant information when needed.

Deep Insights: These tools dive deep into texts, offering detailed analysis and extracting essential points that might be missed otherwise.

Boosted Productivity: By automating repetitive tasks, AI tools let you focus on more critical parts of your work, increasing overall productivity.

To select the best AI tools for literature review, we carefully evaluated several key factors to ensure that  each  tool provides significant value to researchers, students, and academics. Here’s how we picked the top tools:

Functionality: We looked at the core features each tool offers, such as summarization, reference management, and advanced search capabilities. Tools that provide comprehensive and unique features stood out.

User Experience: The ease of use and intuitive interface were essential. We favored tools that are user-friendly and require minimal training, making them accessible for everyone.

Pricing: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of each tool, considering both free and paid options. Tools that offer a good balance between features and affordability were given priority.

Performance and Accuracy: We tested how well each tool performs its tasks, such as summarizing research papers or managing references. Tools that deliver accurate and reliable results were preferred.

Customer Reviews: User feedback and reviews helped us gauge the real-world effectiveness of each tool. We considered both positive and critical reviews to ensure a well-rounded selection.

By focusing on these criteria, we identified the best AI tools for literature review that provide robust features, ease of use, and excellent value, making them ideal choices for anyone involved in academic research. 

To wrap things up, the right AI tool can make a huge difference in your literature review process, turning hours of work into a streamlined, efficient task. Each tool on the list has its strengths—like Research Rabbit’s intuitive organization or Semantic Scholar’s smart search options. However, Elephas really shines when it comes to an all-in-one solution.

With its blend of multiple AI models, offline support, and features like Super Brain indexing, Elephas isn't just another tool—it's a game-changer for anyone serious about research. 

It simplifies complex tasks and adapts to your workflow, making it an indispensable part of your toolkit. If you want to elevate your literature review experience and work smarter, Elephas is the choice to make.

However, test out each tool according to your requirements and choose the one that fits best to your needs. All the best AI tools for literature are the best; you need to choose the one that can exactly fit your research requirements.

Elephas is the best AI tool for literature review, offering a comprehensive suite of features including offline capabilities, multiple AI models, and advanced indexing options like Super Brain for YouTube and web pages.

AI tools for literature review are versatile and can be adapted to various research fields. However, their effectiveness may vary depending on the complexity of the research topic and the specific needs of the researcher. Research and choose the tool that aligns with your research objectives. 

Some limitations of AI tools for literature review include potential biases in AI algorithms, the need for human oversight to ensure accuracy, and the possibility of missing nuanced information that requires expert interpretation. It’s important to use AI tools as a supplement to, rather than a replacement for, thorough research

AI assistant

Sign up now

Get a deep dive into the most important AI story of the week. Deliverd to your inbox for free!

Elephas helps you write faster and smarter on Mac - It's the best AI powered writing assistant for your Apple devices - Mac, iPhone and iPad.

You may also want to read

What’s New from Apple? iPhone 16 with AI, Apple Watch Series 10, and More!

iPhone Productivity

Jenni AI Review HONEST Review (2024): Is it the Best AI Writing Assistant for Research Papers

How to Use AI for Literature Review (2024): Complete 7 Step Guide for Researchers