Accelerating Systematic Reviews: A Novel One-Week Screening Protocol Using Rule-Based Automation with AI-Assisted Python Coding

Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2025 Sep 12. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00374.2025. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

The exponential growth in academic publishing – exceeding 2 million papers annually 2023 – has rendered traditional systematic review methods unsustainable^1-3. These conventional approaches typically require 6-24 months for completion^4-6, creating critical delays between evidence availability and clinical implementation. While existing automation tools demonstrate workload reductions of 30-72.5%, their machine learning dependencies create barriers to immediate implementation^7-10. Additionally, direct AI screening methods involve substantial computational costs, lack real-time adaptability, suffer from inconsistent performance across different research domains, and provide no clear audit trail for regulatory compliance. We present a one-week systematic review acceleration protocol using rule-based automation where artificial intelligence (AI) assists with code generation. Researchers define screening criteria, then use AI language models (Claude, ChatGPT) as coding assistants. This protocol employs a two-phase screening process: (1) rule-based title/abstract screening and (2) rule-based full-text analysis, while adhering to established systematic review guidelines such as Cochrane methodology and PRISMA reporting^{5, 6}. The rule-based system provides immediate implementation with complete transparency, while validation framework guides researchers in systematically testing screening sensitivity to minimize false negatives and ensure comprehensive study capture; meta-analysis and statistical synthesis remain manual processes requiring human expertise. We demonstrate the protocol’s application through a case study examining cardiac fatty acid oxidation in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)¹¹, and validated through a separate review examining e-cigarette versus traditional cigarette cardiopulmonary effects, which successfully processed 3,791 records¹². This protocol represents a substantial advancement in systematic review methodology, making high-quality evidence synthesis more accessible across a broad range of scientific disciplines.

PMID:40939020 | DOI:10.1152/ajpheart.00374.2025