Kahubi vs Rayyan
Rayyan is one of the most widely used screening tools for systematic reviews, and for good reason: blind screening, conflict resolution and relevance ranking make the title and abstract stage much faster. Kahubi covers screening too, as one step in a flow that starts with the search and ends with a written review.
What Rayyan does well
Credit where it's due: these are real strengths, and for some workflows they are exactly what you need.
- Blind screening with clear conflict resolution between reviewers
- Relevance ranking that learns from your decisions
- Labels, exclusion reasons and keyword highlighting built for screening
- Widely known by librarians and review teams, with a mobile app
Where Kahubi differs
Search to written review in one flow
Kahubi’s systematic review flow starts before screening: frame the question, generate and edit search strings, run the search on OpenAlex and Semantic Scholar, then screen. After screening, the included papers become the grounded context for a written review that follows PRISMA, MOOSE or Cochrane reporting.
AI suggestions you confirm
For every record, Kahubi suggests include or exclude with a short reason based on your criteria. You confirm or overturn it, and every decision is logged, so the PRISMA numbers come straight from the record.
Full texts the AI can read
Open-access PDFs are fetched automatically for included papers, and the agent reads them when you ask about methods, outcomes or risk of bias. Extraction questions get answers with the source paper cited.
Analysis and writing in the same project
Run statistics on extracted data, draft the results and discussion in your citation style, and export to Word or compile to PDF.
Feature comparison
| Capability | Rayyan | Kahubi |
|---|---|---|
| Chats with your full library | No | Yesthe agent reads, searches, and cites your whole library |
| Edits a real LaTeX manuscript (compiled to PDF) | No | YesLaTeX → PDF compile built in, plus .docx and .tex export |
| Systematic review flow with PRISMA support | Partialcollaborative screening, extraction and PRISMA diagram; write-up elsewhere | Yesdefine → search → screen → written review (PRISMA, MOOSE, Cochrane) |
| Statistics on your CSVs (t-tests, ANOVA, regression…) | No | Yesfrom t-tests to PCA and Cronbach’s alpha, results land in your draft |
| Interview transcription processed in the EU | No | Yesspeaker labels, 99+ languages, EU-based providers |
| Learns your writing voice from your papers | No | Yesa style profile learned from your own publications |
Last reviewed October 2026. Based on each product's public materials. Features change, so verify details on their site. Spotted something out of date? Tell us and we'll fix it.
Choose Rayyan if…
You have a large team doing formal dual screening and your institution already uses Rayyan.
Choose Kahubi if…
You want search, AI-assisted screening, full-text reading and the written review in one place, especially as a solo researcher or small team.
Kahubi pricing
Simple monthly plans, cancel anytime. A real free tier to start with, and predictable monthly cost on every paid plan.
Try Kahubi on a small project
For a single ongoing study
For active researchers
For labs and heavy users
Kahubi vs Rayyan: common questions
Can Kahubi replace Rayyan?
Does Kahubi produce a PRISMA flow diagram?
Is AI screening allowed in a systematic review?
Can I import my Rayyan references into Kahubi?
Try the Kahubi side of the comparison
Sign up free, import your library in minutes, and run one real task (a screening round, an analysis, a draft) before you decide.