ThezisElicit vs. Consensus for literature search: how to use each responsibly
AI research tools can help you find starting points, organize candidate studies, and spot questions to investigate. They cannot replace reading the original study, checking the method, or documenting a systematic search protocol when your assignment requires one.
Separate discovery from evidence
| Task | Useful tool behavior | Your responsibility |
|---|---|---|
| Explore a new topic | Generate terms, related papers, and possible subquestions. | Decide whether the source is relevant and authoritative. |
| Screen a candidate list | Help organize titles, abstracts, or extraction fields. | Apply your inclusion criteria and inspect uncertain cases. |
| Write a claim | Surface a study or excerpt to investigate. | Read the original, check scope and limitations, then cite the original source. |
Elicit describes a systematic-review workflow with screening and data extraction features. That can be useful for organizing research, but a feature does not remove the need for a transparent protocol, human judgment, and verification appropriate to the stakes of the work. Elicit: Systematic literature reviews
Test accuracy with a question you already know
Choose three papers you have already read. Search a focused question. For each tool output, compare the title, author, publication date, study design, sample, finding, and limitation with the paper itself. Record every mismatch before deciding whether the tool saves time in your field.
This trial is more informative than a generic ‘best AI research tool’ list because it exposes the kinds of mistakes that matter for your work.
For systematic reviews, follow the required reporting standards and library guidance. Do not report a search as comprehensive merely because an AI tool returned a long list of papers. PRISMA 2020 statement