Deep Review

Compare multiple sources across themes in a single table.

Paste one source per line: title, authors, abstract or notes, and build a matrix that aligns each source against recurring themes. Instead of re-reading everything, you see agreements, gaps and contradictions at a glance, ready to turn into a literature review. The structured output is immediately usable as the skeleton of a literature review section, saving hours of manual organisation.

Check whether a source actually supports, or contradicts, a claim.

Before you cite, confirm the source says what you think it says. Claim checking surfaces whether the evidence supports or contrasts your statement, so you avoid mis-citation and build arguments on solid ground. This extra check is especially valuable in fast-moving fields where a source's conclusion is often more nuanced than its title suggests.

Define the columns you need, then fill them across every paper at once.

A systematic review lives or dies on pulling the same handful of facts out of dozens of papers: the population studied, the method used, the sample size, the single key finding. Doing that by hand is slow and drifts as you tire. Define the columns your protocol needs, add your references, and Flowcite reads every paper and fills the grid in one pass. The result is a structured table you can scan for gaps, sort, and export as CSV straight into your analysis.

Find the journals your manuscript actually fits, and check it is ready to send.

Choosing where to submit is usually guesswork built on the handful of journals you already read, and a mismatch costs months in desk rejections. Paste your title and abstract and Flowcite suggests target journals whose scope matches what you have written, alongside a submission-readiness check on the manuscript itself. You go into the submission knowing both that the venue fits and that the paper is in a state worth sending.