Build an evidence table from a literature review

Research & market intelligence · Business data & reporting · checked 2026-10-17

Run the review in Elicit and pull the extraction table over MCP or export it as CSV, analyze it in Julius AI, and let Claude summarize what the evidence supports. Pair with Consensus for coverage.

Independent review. IonBin has no partnership with any tool on this page and was not paid for this page. Our evaluation is our own, based on public documentation and our research. Product names are trademarks of their owners and are used for identification only. How disclosure works.

Goal

Answer “does X work?” with a table you can defend.

Connects through: MCP · Upload / export

Steps

#WhoWhat happensHowStatus
1Elicit Finds papers and extracts data into a table; reach it through Elicit’s MCP server or export the table as CSV
MCP and API need Pro, Scale or Enterprise; CSV export of Research Agent tables starts on Plus.
MCP Confirmed · source ↗
2Julius AI Analyzes the exported table Upload / export Confirmed · source ↗
3Claude Summarizes what the evidence supports AI platform Confirmed
4You Check a sample of extractions against the papers Human step Confirmed

Confirmed means the vendor documents it (linked). It doesn't mean IonBin has tested it. AI-platform and human steps need no source.

Human approval

You check extractions before relying on the summary.

Watch out for

Keep the human approval step: You check extractions before relying on the summary.

Starter prompt

Goal: Answer “does X work?” with a table you can defend. Tools involved: Elicit, Julius AI, Claude. Your part: finds papers and extracts data into a table; reach it through elicit’s mcp server or export the table as csv; summarizes what the evidence supports. Work step by step, show me each draft or proposed change, and wait for my approval before anything is sent, published, signed, filed or changed in a live system.

Assembled from this page’s goal and steps. Paste it into your AI platform and adjust it to your situation.

Tools in this workflow

ToolRoleOfficial site
ElicitMCP elicit.com ↗
Julius AIUpload / export julius.ai ↗
ClaudeAI platform claude.ai ↗
ConsensusOptional consensus.app ↗

Which AI platforms can run it

PlatformStatusWhy
Claude (incl. Claude Code) To verify Elicit: pairing not named in vendor docs
OpenAI Codex To verify Elicit: pairing not named in vendor docs
Google Antigravity To verify Elicit: pairing not named in vendor docs
ChatGPT To verify Elicit: pairing not named in vendor docs
Gemini To verify Elicit: pairing not named in vendor docs
Perplexity To verify Elicit: pairing not named in vendor docs

Computed from the MCP and API steps only: "Confirmed" needs the tool's docs to name the platform and the platform to support the connection. Browser, upload and human steps work from any platform.

What we checked (2026-10-17)

  • Elicit MCP and API are available on Pro, Scale and Enterprise plans, and they sign in with OAuth.
  • Exports. Tables export as CSV or Excel, reports as PDF or Word, and references as RIS or BIB. Plus and higher plans can export Research Agent tables. Pro and higher can export Systematic Review tables.
  • Julius AI has no MCP server, so you upload the CSV yourself. Plus is $16 a month billed annually.
  • Consensus MCP searches more than 400 million scholarly articles. It’s a useful second search to catch papers Elicit missed.

Set it up

  1. Run the search in Elicit and add the extraction columns you need, such as population, intervention, outcome and effect size.
  2. Export the table as CSV and upload it to Julius for counts and charts.
  3. Ask Claude to summarize what the evidence supports, where it conflicts and where it’s missing.
  4. Check at least one in ten extractions against the papers, plus every row that drives a conclusion.

Sources

Related workflows

No affiliate links on this page. No paid placements in workflows. How IonBin makes money.