The idea
A step beyond the synthesis matrix: define the exact fields your review needs — sample size, study design, population, intervention, outcome measures, effect sizes, risk-of-bias rating — and extract them from every included paper into a single structured table. Folio drafts each cell from the source; you verify and correct; the whole thing exports to CSV or straight into your meta-analysis.
Why it matters
Data extraction is the most tedious, error-prone stage of a systematic review, and it's usually done by hand across a dozen spreadsheets with two reviewers reconciling differences. A structured, source-linked extraction table — where every number is traceable to the sentence it came from — cuts the drudgery and makes the reconciliation honest. It's the difference between a review that takes a semester and one that takes a month.
Where we are
Exploring, and a strong fit with the synthesis matrix that already exists. The bar is traceability: every extracted value has to point back to its exact place in the source, or it's not trustworthy enough to build a meta-analysis on. That's the part we want to get right before shipping.
Upvote this if it's on your wishlist — it helps us prioritize.