Practical Session: Data Extraction in RevProHub

Two-Phase Extraction 1‑to‑Many Repeater Logic 90 minutes
Practical Session Objectives:
By the end of this hands-on session, participants will be able to:
  • Navigate the RevProHub Data Extraction Dashboard
  • Assign extraction tasks to reviewers (bulk and individual)
  • Extract study characteristics and outcome data using structured forms
  • Use AI-assisted extraction from full text
  • Implement 1-to-many repeater fields for qualitative findings
  • Resolve extraction conflicts using the Mediator role
  • Export final consensus data for meta-analysis

Part 1: Data Extraction Dashboard

Navigate to: Main Project Dashboard → Conducting Phase → Data Extraction Dashboard


0
Ready to Extract

2
My In Progress

0
Pending Conflicts

0
Completed

N/A
Inter-Rater Reliability
1 Manage Forms: If no extraction form exists, the dashboard shows a setup alert. Create forms first in Planning → Extraction Form Planning (Session 2.6.12).
2 Assign All Pending: Use the modal to assign all awaiting studies to reviewers (select form, reviewers, start/due dates).
3 Studies Ready Table: Lists studies that passed screening, ready for extraction. Click "Extract" to begin.
Stats Cards Navigation: Click any card to navigate directly to the respective list (Ready Studies, My Extractions, Conflicts, Completed).

Part 2: Assigning Studies for Extraction

1 Click "Assign All Pending" button (or assign individually from Studies table).
2 Select Extraction Form (e.g., "Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness - Count Data").
3 Select Reviewer(s) – hold Ctrl/Cmd for multiple (enables dual extraction).
4 Set Start Date and Due Date (optional).
5 Click "Assign Queue" – reviewers receive email notifications and tasks appear in "My Extractions".
Dual extraction quality control: Assigning two reviewers to the same study enables automatic conflict detection and resolution, improving data accuracy.

Part 3: The Extraction Interface

Access via: My Extractions → Click study title → Extract with Form

Study Characteristics (Static – extracted once)

Qualitative Findings (1‑to‑Many Repeater Group)

Auto-save: Progress is auto-saved every 30 seconds. Use "Save Progress" button for manual save. Click "Submit Final Extraction" when complete.

Part 4: My Assigned Extractions

Navigate to: Data Extraction Dashboard → My In Progress card → My Extractions

TitleAuthorsYearStatusActions
Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD)...Knorr JP et al.2026in progress
Evaluation of asthma control among adult patients...Titus GJ et al.2025in progress
🔍 Bulk actions: Select multiple studies to clear records or unassign yourself from extractions.

Part 5: Extraction Conflict Resolution (Mediator Role)

Reviewer A:
Intervention N1: 120
Events: 45
Reviewer B:
Intervention N1: 125
Events: 48
Mediator Final:

Inter-Rater Reliability (Kappa): Dashboard calculates Cohen's Kappa for any selected extraction form when sufficient paired data exists.

Part 6: Import, Export & Data Cleaning

Bulk Assessment via CSV
Download template → Extract offline → Import back
Conflict Resolution via CSV
Export conflicts → Resolve in CSV → Re-import resolutions
Data Cleaning Utilities
Standardize dates, trim whitespace across all studies
📤 Export Final Consensus Data: Select form → Choose CSV or DOCX → Export resolved data for meta-analysis in R, SPSS, or RevMan.
Pro Tip for Qualitative Meta-Aggregation: When importing CSV data, include multiple rows for the same Study ID. The system automatically groups them as multiple findings under the repeater group.

Part 7: All Studies Ready for Extraction

Navigate from Dashboard → "Ready to Extract" card or "View List" button.

IDTitleAuthorsYearStatusActions
6002Evaluation and determinants of asthma control among adult patients...Titus GJ et al.2025Ready
5999Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD)...Knorr JP et al.2026Ready
🔎 Features: Search by title/author/year, sortable columns, pagination (10/25/50/100 per page), and individual study assignment.

Part 8: Studies with Pending Conflicts

Navigate from Dashboard → "Pending Conflicts" card → View All.

If no conflicts exist, the list shows "No studies have pending conflicts." Conflicts arise when two reviewers extract different values for the same field.
🧪 Group Hands-On Activity: Data Extraction (50 min)
  1. Access Extraction Dashboard: In your training project, go to Conducting Phase → Data Extraction Dashboard.
  2. Create/Verify Extraction Form: Ensure you have a form from Session 2.6.12 (e.g., "Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness - Count Data" or "Qualitative Synthesis with Repeater").
  3. Assign Studies (Project Manager role): Click "Assign All Pending" → select your form → choose two reviewers (e.g., two team members) → assign. Verify emails/tasks appear.
  4. Extract Data (Reviewer A): Go to "My Extractions" → open a study. Fill Study Characteristics (Author, Year, N1, N2, events). For the repeater group (if qualitative form), add 2-3 theme rows with illustrative quotes. Click "Save Progress", then "Submit Final Extraction".
  5. Extract Data (Reviewer B – same study): Repeat step 4 but introduce at least one discrepancy (e.g., different N1 or events).
  6. Simulate Conflict: After both submit, check Dashboard → "Pending Conflicts" should show the study with number of conflicts.
  7. Mediator Resolution: A third team member (Mediator role) navigates to Conflict Resolution page. Review side-by-side discrepancies, select final values, add rationale, and resolve each field.
  8. Export Final Data: After resolution, go to "Manage Data" → Export Final Consensus Data → select form → export CSV. Open in Excel to view cleaned, reconciled dataset.
  9. (Optional) AI Extraction Test: Paste a study abstract into the AI Extraction Tools textarea, click "AI Extract Data", and observe auto-populated fields.

Debrief Questions:

  • How does two-phase extraction (Study Characteristics + Outcome Data) improve data quality?
  • What is the advantage of the 1-to-many repeater logic for qualitative evidence synthesis?
  • How does the Mediator conflict resolution workflow reduce bias compared to senior reviewer overriding decisions?
  • When would you use CSV bulk import vs. online extraction?
  • How can Inter-Rater Reliability (Kappa) help monitor extraction quality across your team?

Connecting to Data Extraction Theory (Session 3.3)

Key Concepts Applied in RevProHub Extraction Module:
  • Two-Phase Approach: Study characteristics (static) separated from outcome data (repeatable) – aligns with Cochrane/JBI recommendations.
  • Standardized Forms: Prevents ad-hoc extraction, ensures consistency across reviewers.
  • Dual Extraction: Two independent reviewers + conflict resolution = reduced data entry errors.
  • 1-to-Many Repeater Logic: Enables qualitative meta-aggregation (multiple findings per study).
  • AI Assistance: Speeds up extraction by auto-populating fields from full text (human verification still required).
Data Extraction Module Completion Checklist:
✔ Extraction form created in Planning Phase (Session 2.6.12)
✔ Studies assigned to reviewers (bulk or individual)
✔ Study characteristics extracted and saved
✔ Outcome data extracted (quantitative) OR themes/quotes extracted (qualitative with repeater)
✔ Conflicts resolved by Mediator
✔ Final consensus data exported for analysis
✔ Understanding of CSV bulk import for offline extraction

Next Practical Session: Synthesis & Reporting (Meta-analysis, PRISMA diagram, Manuscript Editor).

2026 RevProHub Training – Ethiopia Ministry of Health & ESEP
Practical Session: Data Extraction | Two-Phase Extraction | Repeater Logic (1-to-Many) | Conflict Resolution | AI-Assisted Extraction