PICO Analysis — Structure Your Systematic Review
PICO, PICOS, PICOT, PECO, SPIDER, or a framework of your own — define the dimensions your review question requires, assign terms to each, and let Gaptrium™ map your entire corpus against them. Deterministically. Reproducibly. No AI required.
What is PICO Analysis?
PICO Analysis structures your corpus around a research question's components — by default Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, but every domain name and term list is fully editable. Rename domains to match PICOS, PICOT, PECO, SPIDER, or any framework specific to your field. Assign terms to each domain, and Gaptrium™ builds a Document Heat Map showing how strongly each document covers each dimension.
Domain terms feed directly into the Evidence Gap Map, turning your PICO structure into a two-dimensional view of where evidence exists and where it doesn't.
Available from Scope and above. Start your free trial →
Built for real regulatory submissions
PICO Analysis isn't a generic academic exercise — it's built to match the terminology each HTA agency actually expects in a submission.
G-BA / AMNOG (Germany)
Rename the Comparator domain to zVT — zweckmäßige Vergleichstherapie — with a single click. Existing terms are kept. The label matches the comparator terminology required for §35a SGB V benefit dossiers, so your domain structure reads correctly to a German reviewer from the first page.
CONITEC (Brazil)
Generate a structured .docx that follows the Ministério da Saúde/CONITEC methodological guideline section by section — populated automatically from your PICO domains, Search Log, and PRISMA Checklist. CONITEC publishes its requirements as PDF guidance; it does not distribute an editable template. Gaptrium™ builds the one you'd otherwise build from scratch on every project.
Who uses PICO Analysis?
HTA & HEOR Consultancies
Structure the evidence question for every submission the same reproducible way — across CONITEC, NCPE, NICE, and G-BA dossiers.
Pharma & Biotech Market Access
Run an internal first pass on the evidence landscape before commissioning a full systematic review from an external consultancy.
Systematic Review Authors
Define your review question once, in whichever framework your methodology section requires, and keep every downstream analysis consistent with it.
Evidence Synthesis Teams
Use a custom framework — PECO, SPIDER, or bespoke — for reviews outside the strict clinical-trial PICO mould.
Frequently asked questions
Do I have to use the PICO framework specifically?
No. The four default domains are a starting point. Rename them, add or remove domains (up to 10), and define your own terms — PICOS, PICOT, PECO, SPIDER, or a fully custom structure.
Does the zVT label change how the analysis works?
No — it only renames the Comparator domain and keeps its existing terms. It exists purely to match the terminology a German G-BA/AMNOG reviewer expects to see.
What does the CONITEC template include automatically?
Your PICO domains and terms, your PRISMA Search Log (database, date, search string, results), your Merge & Deduplicate summary, and your PRISMA 2020 Checklist completion status — all read from your current session. Sections requiring reviewer judgement (eligibility criteria, risk of bias, discussion) are left as clearly marked placeholders.
Does generating the CONITEC template upload anything?
No. The .docx is built entirely in your browser from data already in your session and downloaded directly to your device. Nothing is sent to Lacuna Labs servers.
Is PICO Analysis deterministic?
Yes. The Document Heat Map is built from exact term-presence counts per domain. There is no language model involved and no risk of hallucinated coverage.