Turn verified identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion counts into a clear study-selection visual.
Academic Support for Evidence Synthesis
Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis Graphics Service
Turn verified screening counts, meta-analysis outputs, risk-of-bias results and included-study information into clear, consistent figures for systematic reviews, scoping reviews and evidence-synthesis manuscripts.
PRISMA-based study-selection visuals
Forest & funnel plots from verified output
Risk-of-bias & evidence-synthesis graphics
Clear working-day turnaround by scope
We improve visual presentation without changing your screening counts, analysis values, risk-of-bias ratings or review conclusions.
Illustrative review-graphics workspace
PRISMA 2020 Study-Selection Diagram
Accurate representationVisuals are built from researcher-supplied verified review information.
Publication-focused outputFigure layout can be aligned to current target-journal requirements you provide.
Review-specific supportGraphics are selected according to the evidence-synthesis design and requested scope.
Consistent visual systemA coordinated figure set can use consistent labels, spacing and presentation.
Common Research Needs
When Researchers Ask for Review Graphics Support
These are practical situations that arise when the evidence synthesis is already being conducted but the study-selection, analysis or review outputs still need to be communicated clearly.
Present the researcher-supplied effect estimates and intervals in a more readable figure layout.
Create a coordinated publication-style plot from the verified analysis output supplied for the review.
Convert researcher-supplied domain ratings into a clearer summary graphic without changing the assessments.
Organise included-study information into a visual that helps readers see the structure of the evidence base.
Show the search and study-selection pathway as a structured diagram appropriate to the review context.
Translate selected included-study information into a visual summary when that format is appropriate to the review.
Bring the review graphics into a more consistent visual system without altering the underlying review evidence.
Evidence-Synthesis Visuals
What We Create
A focused set of systematic-review and meta-analysis graphics based on the review information and verified outputs you supply.
Who This Is For
Researchers Preparing Evidence-Synthesis Outputs
This service is most relevant when the review methods, screening decisions or analysis outputs are already available and need clearer visual presentation.
Review & Evidence-Synthesis Areas
Research Areas We Support
The supported scope is defined by review design rather than by claiming unsupported subject-matter specialisms.
Systematic Reviews
PRISMA study-selection visuals, risk-of-bias graphics and other review-summary figures built from supplied review information.
Meta-Analyses
Forest plots, funnel plots and supporting graphics based on verified meta-analysis output supplied by the researcher.
Scoping Reviews
Study-selection, evidence-map, literature-search and review-summary visuals for broader evidence-mapping work.
Umbrella Reviews
Clear study or review selection and synthesis visuals for projects combining evidence from multiple reviews.
Literature Reviews
Literature-search flows, bibliometric maps, evidence maps and study-characteristic graphics where relevant to the review.
Evidence-Synthesis Research
Coordinated visual sets that help communicate how evidence was identified, assessed, synthesised and summarised.
What We Need From You
The figure can only be as accurate as the review information supplied. Send verified project inputs rather than estimates or reconstructed numbers.
Required for the relevant graphic
- 1Review type and requested graphics. Tell us whether the project is a systematic review, scoping review, meta-analysis, umbrella review, literature review or another evidence-synthesis project in the supported scope.
- 2Screening counts and PRISMA information. Provide the verified identification, deduplication, screening, eligibility and inclusion information needed for the study-selection visual.
- 3Verified meta-analysis output. Supply the effect estimates, intervals and other output needed for a requested forest or funnel plot.
- 4Risk-of-bias results. Provide the completed ratings or summary data when a risk-of-bias visual is part of the scope.
- 5Included-study information. Share the study-level information required for evidence maps, study-characteristic graphics, bibliometric maps or review summaries.
Helpful if available
- ✓Current target-journal figure or artwork instructions.
- ✓Existing draft figures or a preferred consistent visual direction.
- ✓Manuscript section, captions or terminology needed to label the figures accurately.
What You Receive
Deliverables are based on the agreed review-graphics scope and the source material you provide.
- ✓PRISMA-compliant study-selection diagram based on the screening information and counts you supply.
- ✓Forest and funnel graphics where applicable using your verified meta-analysis output.
- ✓Risk-of-bias, evidence-map or review-summary graphics where they are included in the project scope.
- ✓Publication-ready versions prepared in the agreed final format for your manuscript or review project.
- ✓Editable versions where supported by the selected figure type and agreed production method.
- ✓Consistent visual treatment across the set so related review graphics use coordinated labels, spacing and presentation.
Format confirmation: because different journals and figure types have different requirements, final and editable file formats are confirmed from the requested graphics and current submission requirements before production.
Visuals are designed around evidence-synthesis reporting needs.
Review counts, ratings and analysis values come from the researcher.
Current journal instructions can guide presentation and output.
From PRISMA to final evidence-synthesis figure sets where agreed.
Related review figures can share a unified visual system.
Illustrative Portfolio
Sample Review Graphics
These are demonstration concepts showing service-relevant figure types. They are not presented as client publications, journal acceptances or university work.
Database and study-selection workflow.
Meta-analysis effect estimates and intervals.
Publication-bias visualisation layout.
Study-by-domain traffic-light presentation.
Structured overview of the included evidence base.
Literature-search and screening pathway.
Mapped literature relationships for review exploration.
Visual grouping of included-study information.
Input → Improved Output
From Disconnected Review Inputs to a Clear Figure Set
The aim is better hierarchy, labelling, consistency and readability while preserving the researcher-supplied counts, ratings and analysis values.
Before — researcher-supplied review inputs
→
After — coordinated publication-ready review graphics
Illustrative transformation only. The output becomes clearer; the underlying review evidence does not change.
Transparent Workflow
How the Review Graphics Process Works
A review-specific workflow keeps the supplied counts, analysis outputs, labels and final figure requirements aligned from start to delivery.
Provide screening counts, review type and relevant verified analysis or bias outputs.
Agree which PRISMA, forest, funnel, bias, mapping or summary figures are required.
Build the visuals from the supplied values and study information using a consistent figure system.
Check counts, labels, study names, terminology and presentation before final export.
Receive the agreed publication-ready and editable versions where supported.
Standard Delivery Windows
Turnaround Time
Standard timing follows the scope in the service catalogue and is confirmed after the supplied review material is checked.
PRISMA Diagram1 working dayBased on complete verified screening information.
Forest / Funnel Set1–2 working daysBased on complete verified meta-analysis output.
Complete Review Graphics Package3–5 working daysFor a coordinated set of review visuals within the agreed scope.
Unusually large projects, incomplete source material, substantially changed screening/analysis data or additional figures can require confirmation of a revised delivery schedule.
Submission Requirements
Journal & Review-Figure Requirements
Current external specifications matter because journals can differ in permitted formats, dimensions, figure naming and artwork expectations.
If you are targeting a journal, provide its current figure or artwork instructions rather than relying on assumed specifications.
Tell us whether each visual is for the manuscript, supplementary material, thesis/dissertation or another supported evidence-synthesis output.
Study names, domains, abbreviations, effect labels and other figure wording should be checked against your review before finalisation.
Revision Scope
How Revisions Are Handled
Revision rounds and scope are confirmed before work begins. The important distinction is whether the requested change refines the approved review graphic or changes the underlying project scope.
Refinement Within the Approved Brief
Typical refinements can include presentation changes that keep the same supplied review evidence and agreed figure concept.
- Label or terminology corrections
- Layout, spacing or alignment refinements
- Legend, typography or visual-consistency adjustments
- Corrections using already approved source information
Changes That May Become New Scope
Substantive changes can require a new scope because they alter the data, analysis, figure set or submission requirements.
- A new figure or new visual concept
- A changed dataset or changed meta-analysis output
- Substantially changed screening counts
- Additional risk-of-bias or mapping outputs
- New journal specifications introduced after completion
No fixed revision count is assumed on this page. The revision approach is confirmed with the project scope before work starts.
Visual Improvement Without Evidence Manipulation
Systematic-review graphics must reflect the review that was actually conducted. We improve presentation and communication, but the research team remains responsible for the screening decisions, analysis, risk-of-bias judgments and scientific conclusions.
For this service, screening counts and analysis values must be supplied or verified by the researcher before they are visualised.
No fabricated review dataMissing screening counts, effect estimates or study details are not invented to complete a graphic.
No changed statistical resultsEffect values, confidence intervals, sample sizes and statistical results remain as supplied.
No altered bias ratingsRisk-of-bias visuals reproduce the researcher-supplied domain judgments rather than replacing them.
No altered review conclusionDesign choices are not used to exaggerate, suppress or reverse the interpretation of the evidence.
No invented citationsStudy names, references and labels should come from your verified review records.
No publication guaranteeClearer graphics can improve presentation, but journal acceptance is not guaranteed.
Questions Before You Start
Frequently Asked Questions
Answers focus on the actual systematic-review and meta-analysis graphics scope, inputs, timelines and academic-integrity boundaries.
What graphics are included in this systematic review and meta-analysis service?
The service can cover PRISMA flow diagrams, study-selection visuals, forest plots, funnel plots, risk-of-bias graphics, evidence maps, literature-search flows, bibliometric maps, study-characteristic graphics and review-summary figures, depending on the scope of your review project.
Can you prepare a PRISMA 2020 flow diagram from my screening counts?
Yes. A PRISMA-style study-selection diagram can be prepared from the screening and inclusion counts you supply. The numbers must come from your verified review records; missing counts are not invented.
Do you calculate the meta-analysis or statistical results for the forest plot?
This graphics service works from researcher-supplied verified meta-analysis output. We do not fabricate effect estimates, confidence intervals, sample sizes, significance results or other analysis values simply to complete a figure.
Can you create both forest plots and funnel plots for the same review?
Yes, where those figures are appropriate to your project and you provide the verified analysis output needed for each visual. A coordinated figure set can be prepared so the graphics share a consistent presentation style.
Can you turn risk-of-bias results into a visual summary?
Yes. Risk-of-bias results supplied by the researcher can be formatted into clear review graphics, such as a study-by-domain summary or traffic-light style visual, without changing the underlying ratings.
What information should I provide before the project starts?
Provide your review type, screening counts and PRISMA information, verified meta-analysis output where applicable, risk-of-bias results where applicable, included-study information and the details needed for the specific graphics you want created.
Can you provide editable files?
Editable and publication-ready versions can be provided where the selected graphic type and agreed production method support them. The exact editable format is confirmed with the project scope before work begins.
How long does systematic review graphics preparation take?
A PRISMA diagram has a standard turnaround of 1 working day. A forest and funnel plot set takes 1–2 working days. A complete review graphics package takes 3–5 working days. Final timing is confirmed if the project is unusually large, incomplete or materially changes after work starts.
Can the figures be prepared for a target journal?
Yes. If your journal has current artwork, sizing, file-format or figure-presentation requirements, share the official instructions so the agreed outputs can be prepared with those requirements in mind. Numeric specifications are not assumed when they are not supplied.
How are revisions handled?
Revision rounds and scope are confirmed before work begins. Refinements to labels, layout and presentation within the approved brief are different from new scope such as a new figure, changed analysis, new dataset, substantially changed screening counts or new journal specifications after completion.
Can you update a graphic if my screening counts or analysis change?
Updated researcher-supplied values can be incorporated when the change remains within the agreed project scope. Material changes to the review data, analysis or required figure set may need a revised scope and delivery schedule.
Does this service guarantee journal acceptance or publication?
No. The service improves the clarity, consistency and submission readiness of review graphics based on the evidence and values you supply, but it does not guarantee journal acceptance or alter the scientific outcome of the review.
How should I share sensitive or unpublished review material?
The enquiry form collects project details only and does not upload files. Keep the minimum necessary review material ready to share after the enquiry is reviewed, and follow any institutional or project-specific data-handling requirements that apply to your work.
Systematic Review Graphics Enquiry
Ready to Turn Your Review Outputs Into Clear Figures?
Tell us which review graphics you need and what verified material is already available. Keep your screening counts, meta-analysis output, risk-of-bias results, included-study information and current journal guidance ready to share after the enquiry is reviewed.
Tell us your review typeSystematic review, scoping review, meta-analysis, umbrella review, literature review or other supported evidence-synthesis project.
List the graphics you needFor example, PRISMA, forest, funnel, risk-of-bias, evidence map or a coordinated review-graphics set.
Share your deadlineStandard delivery follows the published working-day ranges and is confirmed from the final scope.
Discuss Your Review Graphics
Submit the project details below. This form does not upload files; supporting materials can be shared after the enquiry is reviewed.
Keep your screening counts, PRISMA information, verified meta-analysis output, risk-of-bias results, included-study information and current submission guidelines ready to share after the enquiry is reviewed. Do not send unnecessary sensitive information.