A-Infor
commented
1 year ago I’m executing my review in phases, in each of these I must track how they were rejected. For this, I’m setting them as e.g. “Title/Keywords/Abstract OK” and setting as Accepted. My idea is to finish this phase, then go back to the articles and enter the next phase where I e.g. review the Intro/Section titles/Conclusion. My idea was to “reset” the previously accepted articles and start their review again, now in more detail. For this I would need this reset with a “Mark as unclassified” button.
My current workaround would be to set them all as duplicated and then from there either mark as accepted or rejected.
You could just add a new temporary inclusion/exclusion criteria named, for example, "to be reviewed again". Then you would know that those articles with the temporary tag are... to be reviewed again. Wouldn't this do the job?
Anyway, issue https://github.com/vitorfs/parsifal/issues/97 speaks as if what you request has already been implemented.
Thanks for sharing the idea of setting articles as “Title/Keywords/Abstract OK”.
Dear Parsif.al team.
I’m using your tool for a systematic mapping. It’s helping me a lot, thank you! If I may offer a suggestion one thing that I’m missing is a “Mark as unclassified” button in the mass change option for article selection.
I’m executing my review in phases, in each of these I must track how they were rejected. For this, I’m setting them as e.g. “Title/Keywords/Abstract OK” and setting as Accepted. My idea is to finish this phase, then go back to the articles and enter the next phase where I e.g. review the Intro/Section titles/Conclusion. My idea was to “reset” the previously accepted articles and start their review again, now in more detail. For this I would need this reset with a “Mark as unclassified” button.
My current workaround would be to set them all as duplicated and then from there either mark as accepted or rejected.
Thank you!