Covidence vs Laser AI (2026): which should you pick?
As of Nov 13, 2026, Covidence grades higher than Laser AI: 2.2 against 1.4 out of 4.0.
Checked Nov 12, 2026 and Nov 13, 2026 · graded Nov 12, 2026 and Nov 13, 2026 by ToolGPA
Covidence grades higher on the free plan, features and platforms. They get the same grade on value for money and ease of use.
Price, platforms and features side by side. The table says where each price was read and when.
Covidence
Web platform for screening and extracting data in systematic reviews
Laser AI
AI-assisted screening and data extraction for systematic reviews
Which one is for you
Pick Covidence if
- Fits if you're running a systematic review with two reviewers screening
- Works for a team that already keeps its references in EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley
Look elsewhere if
- Pricey if you're a student: the page says there's no separate student discount
- Tight if you run more than three reviews, as that means several packages or a site license
- Skip it if you just want to read papers, since it only does review screening
- Watch out: each license covers a set number of reviews for 12 months
- Watch out: the trial is 500 records, and there are no apps beyond the browser
Pick Laser AI if
- Fits if you run reviews for a research organisation with budget
- Works for teams who want unlimited users on one project
Look elsewhere if
- Pricey if you are a student or solo, at $3,000 a project or a year
- Skip it if you want to try before paying, as no free tier or trial is shown, only a demo
- Watch out: the page labels the $3,000-a-year plan Per user in one view and Team in another
- Watch out: every plan is bought by contacting the vendor, with no self-serve checkout
How we grade them
| 2.2GPACovidenceFair | 1.4GPALaser AIWeak | |
|---|---|---|
| Value for money | D$339 a year for one review, $907 for up to three. That works out to about $28 a month for one review, inside the research category's dearest tenth, which starts at $20. | D$3,000 per project for up to 18 months, or $3,000 a year, which is about $250 a month. Unlimited users on a project helps a team, but the category's dearest tenth starts at $23. |
| Free plan and trial | CA free trial with 500 records. The page does not say whether a card is needed, and 500 records is smaller than most reviews. | FNo free tier or free trial is shown on the pricing page, only a demo. |
| Features | BImport, dual screening, extraction, quality assessment, mobile screening and PRISMA numbers. Nothing in the listing shows a gap in the review work itself. | CScreening prioritisation, extraction suggestions, deduplication and reference matching. The listing shows the price unit unclear between per user and per team. |
| Ease of use | CNo store rating on record. You set up a review, invite reviewers and set criteria before anything happens. | CNo store rating on record, and a review has to be set up and loaded first. |
| Platforms and integrations | BWeb, with EndNote, Zotero, Mendeley, RefWorks and RevMan. No desktop or app-store apps are listed. | CWeb only, with no integrations or API listed. |
| Best for | screening and extracting data in systematic reviews | AI screening for systematic reviews |
The GPA is the average of the five grades: an A is 4 points, an F is none. The full reasons are on each tool's page: Covidence and Laser AI. How we grade
Price against what you get
Covidence starts at $28.25 a month when paid by the year and scores 2.7 out of 4 on features, ease of use and platforms. Laser AI starts at $3,000 a month and scores 2.0.
Covidence scores higher and starts $2,971.75 a month lower. Of the other AI research tools on the chart, 6 score higher than Covidence for less, and 45 score higher than Laser AI for less.
Features, ease of use and platforms, averaged
What paid plans start at, a month (each step along is roughly double) →
- The best score at each price
- Has a free plan
- No free plan
Where they differ
At a glance
| Covidence | Laser AI | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Free trial | Paid |
| Starts at | $339 per year for one review | $3000 per project, for projects up to 18 months |
| Free plan | None | None |
| Free trial | Free trial with 500 records | None listed |
| Web | ||
| Made by | Covidence | Evidence Prime |
| Price read from | covidence.org | laser.ai |
| Checked | Nov 12, 2026 | Nov 13, 2026 |
Worth knowing
Covidence
- Each paid license covers a set number of reviews for 12 months: 1 for $339 or up to 3 for $907.
- The pricing page says there is no separate student discount, though it offers concessions to review teams in low and lower-middle-income countries.
- More than three reviews means buying several packages or an institutional license.
- The pages read show it as a browser-based service; no desktop or app-store apps are listed.
Laser AI
- Pricing is by project or per year at $3000, and every plan is bought by contacting the vendor.
- No free tier or free trial is shown on the pricing page; a demo can be booked.
- The pricing page labels the $3000-a-year plan 'Per user' in one view and 'Team' in another.
- The per-project price covers projects of up to 18 months.
Key features
Covidence
- Import and deduplication
- References come in from EndNote, Zotero, Mendeley, RefWorks or RIS, CSV and PubMed XML files, with duplicates removed automatically.
- Dual screening
- Independent dual screening, blinding and structured conflict resolution are described as standard, and exclusion reasons are recorded at full-text stage.
- Data extraction and quality assessment
- Extraction and quality assessment are steps inside the same review, so the team works on one copy of the data.
- Mobile screening
- Every plan lists title and abstract screening on a phone.
- PRISMA numbers and export
- The site says PRISMA numbers and the audit trail build as the team works, and the review can be exported.
Laser AI
- AI screening prioritization
- A focus mode and AI ranking put the most relevant abstracts first to reduce screening time.
- Data extraction suggestions
- Suggests text and table values from PDFs, and reviewers validate or edit each entry.
- Deduplication
- Finds duplicate references after bulk uploads; the vendor cites a study showing no lost references.
- Reference matching
- Bulk-uploads PDFs and automatically matches or generates the references for them.
- Reusable libraries
- Keeps screening guides, extraction forms and controlled vocabularies to standardize work across an organization.
- Human-verified workflow
- Keeps a person in the loop with quality control and transparency over AI suggestions.
Plans
Covidence
Single$339
per year for 1 review
One review with unlimited collaborators, valid for 12 months.
Package$907
per year for up to 3 reviews
Up to 3 reviews with unlimited collaborators, valid for 12 months.
InstitutionsCustom
Departmental or organization-wide licenses with unlimited reviews and users, arranged through sales.
Laser AI
Per project$3000
per project, for projects up to 18 months
One project with unlimited users and general customer support; sold through the contact form.
Per user$3000
per year, billed annually
Unlimited projects with general support; shown as 'Per user' in one view and 'Team' in another, so the unit is unclear.
EnterpriseCustom
For companies; optional custom development and premium security, with priority support.
Ways to pay less
Covidence
- Other savings
Concessions for low and lower-middle-income countries
Review teams based in a low or lower-middle-income country can contact Covidence about using it for their review.
Laser AI
No public discounts listed.
Common questions
Which is cheaper, Covidence or Laser AI?
As of Nov 13, 2026, Covidence is cheaper to start with: $28.25 a month when paid by the year, against $3,000 a month for Laser AI. Covidence starts at $339 per year for one review, and Laser AI starts at $3000 per project, for projects up to 18 months.
Which has a free plan, Covidence or Laser AI?
As of Nov 13, 2026, neither Covidence nor Laser AI has a free plan. Covidence has a free trial.
More comparisons
How this page was made
- The verdict at the top follows a fixed rule. When both tools are in the same category and either is in our top three for it, the verdict follows that ranking: the higher-placed tool is our pick. The top three weigh who each tool suits as well as its grades, so a pick can go against the GPA. Otherwise the page does not pick one and says which grades higher: the higher GPA first; on a tie, the one with a free plan, then the one that starts cheaper in dollars a month, counted the same way for both; if they are still level, what the choice depends on.
- The grades are our own, from each tool’s review or report card. The GPA is their average.
- Prices, plans and platforms come from each tool’s listing. The table above says where each price was read and when.
- The differences and the answers to the questions are worked out from those listings.