Hello Louise,

Regarding these 3 questions:

1.

When you click on a checkbox (while coding) it is saved automatically so you don't need to click on Save. If you are editing the citation (which includes the Include flag) then you will need to click on Save. You should only need to click on it once.

Regarding the 'Include' flag that you see in the citation, this flag is not necessarily related to the screening status of an item. It can be used in that way if you choose to. I normally think of the Include/Exclude/Delete flags as more of an Active/Not active flag. 

I normally start with all items marked as Include and then as you move through the review process the number of active or included items become fewer and fewer. This may be as a result of screening or keywording or data extracting. Rather than using this Include flag strictly for screening, I would have an Include screening criteria. You could have multiple Include screening criteria such as 'Include based on Title and Abstract', 'Include based on Full study' or if you are doing multiple level screening, an 'Include on Level 1' or 'Include on Level 2'. It could help you keep track of your process.

2.

If you are single coding (i.e. the codeset is setup for single user data entry) an item is marked as complete automatically when you assign a code to  it.

If your codeset is setup for multiple data entry (the icon next to the codeset shows 2 people) the assumption is that each person will code the same items and then compare what they have done. In this case you would not want to mark the item as complete until agreement has been reached. If you are carrying out multiple data entry (double screening, double coding) you should set up the work allocations on the collaborate page. They system will then keep track of what you have done and allow you to run comparisons. This is described in the user manual.

3.

If your codeset is set for multiple data entry and a person manually marks the item as complete, they are marking as complete what they have done. The system records what each person has coded (based on their login) so if reviewer B marks an item as complete but they have not coded anything on that item, it will be marked as complete with nothing coded. 

As mentioned in point 2, if your codeset is setup for multiple data entry (the icon next to the codeset shows 2 people) the assumption is that each person will code the same items and then compare what they have done. The system will then keep track of each persons coding and guide you through the reconciliation process. This is described in the user manual under 'Coding references or documents'

If you are just having an external person check someone else's coding, it might be better to have the codeset set for single data entry. In that case the item will get marked as complete automatically and the coding will be available to the reporting functions.

If you do a an external person checking the coding they can see all coding applied to an item (by all coders) by turning on Live comparison. To turn this on click on the Coding record tab in the Document details window. Click on the button that says Live comparisons and they click on the codeset that you want to see the coding for. You can then move through the items if you click on the Citation details tab.

We realize that many users have their own processes they follow when carrying out a systematic review. We have tried to make the software as flexible as possible to accomodate these various methods so if you have a specific method please let us know and we should be able to describe how to accomplish that using the programs functions.

Best regards,

Jeff