Using keywords or labels to exclude (rather than include) abstracts when filtering

Ability to rename, delete, and merge labels and exclusion reasons. Badly needed!

Often I want to remove an exclusion or inclusion reason, or a label, but I'm unable to scroll down to the bottom of the list of reasons/labels. I see all the reasons/labels that I haven't assigned to a particular article, but ones I want to remove aren't accessible. This might occur more often when there are lots of reasons/labels - I don't remember.

Being able to use AND when two or more labels are selected. Eg a reference must have both selected labels to be displayed. Currently all references that have either of these labels are displayed.

blinding of author/institution/journal

Add the ability to filter by year to your mobile app.

Add an indicator next to folders on left (e.g. keywords, duplicates etc) which shows percentage of papers resolved in that folder. This may also be achieved with a colour coded strip indicating red for incomplete and green for complete. This would then enable a reviewer to move on to other folders without going back and forth into folders already resolved.

Be able to reject in two waves, so title screening and abstract screening can be done separately

be able to filter based on whether it was judged by only one individual or both.

Currently if I am in the "unresolved duplicates" category and delete duplicates, they get added to the "deleted" folder but they stay under the "unresolved" category unless I refresh it. Similarly, when I am in the "undecided" category and I include or exclude an article, it stays in the undecided category until I go into the category again. It would be good if these were automatically moved out of these lists after applying these actions, as it gets confusing & is annoying to have to manually refresh every single time.

Announcements when Rayyan is down or not functioning properly

Allow multiple tags to be selected before the dropdown menu closes

Would be really useful if, when the option 'unsure' was checked, if it would display this decision similarly to the 'include' and 'exclude' then it would be clear to other reviewers that there is uncertainty over this reference rather than there being no decision shown which leads to uncertainty over whether this has been examined or not.

Like the Tinder dating app. Each study would then be loaded individually on screen and upon swiping, the next article would present itself. Swiping up or down could mean previous or next, respectively without making a decision.

Re-order exclusion reasons. This could be either manual, or dynamically by frequency or recency

Support abstraction

meta analysis tool

It would be quicker to scan through abstracts if you highlight key parts of the abstract like "aims" or "results"...etc.

Ability to set number of reviewers per article.