01BACKGROUND:

You don't have time to sift through millions of papers.

Between patients you get a few spare minutes, an abstract behind a paywall, and no way to tell whether the trial was any good. The literature is not short of answers — it is short of answers written for the ten minutes you actually have.

02OBJECTIVE:

Know in one line whether a paper is worth reading.

Every result leads with the finding, the study type and the sample — enough to tell a meta-analysis on your caseload from an underpowered pilot before you open it.

Every finding comes with its limits.

Every summary names what the study does not show, rates how certain the evidence is, and gives the paper's own declaration of funding and interests wherever it makes one. It all sits right next to the result.

04RESULTS:

Search for a topic and see what the studies found.

PTMeta-Analysis2024
Comparing adaptations from blood flow restriction exercise training using regulated or unregulated pressure systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical rehabilitation · Matthew J Clarkson, Breanna McMahon, Stuart A Warmington
FINDING:Whether the cuff pressure was regulated or fixed before exercise made no difference to gains in strength or muscle size.
DESIGN:Meta-Analysis
SAMPLE:81 studies included; 5 to 60 participants per study; meta-analyses pooled 35 of them
CERTAINTY:Moderate
INTERESTS:The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship or publication of the article, and received no financial support for any of it.
PTOther2016
Cardiovascular response to bouts of exercise with blood flow restriction.Journal of physical therapy science · Kestutis Bunevicius, Arturas Sujeta, Kristina Poderiene, et al.
FINDING:In 24 amateur athletes, one low-intensity calf exercise with groin blood flow restriction raised heart rate less than the same exercise without restriction.
DESIGN:Other
SAMPLE:24 amateur track-and-field athletes (group sizes not stated)
CERTAINTY:Low
05KEY FIGURES:
35,183papers summarised so far, each read in full from its open-access text on PubMed Central
4disciplines, each with its own sub-specialty taxonomy and clinical read
$1a month for unlimited summaries, with the first month free
06LIMITATIONS:

What this does not do.

Not clinical guidance

Use it to find and triage evidence for yourself. Do not present a summary to a patient as guidance — the clinical judgement stays yours.

Only papers you can open

We summarise papers whose full text is free to read, so the original is always one click away. Good papers behind a paywall are missing for now.

Retracted papers come down

A paper marked retracted is taken off the site. Each paper's record is re-checked about every two weeks, so a new retraction can take that long to catch. If you find one first, report it and it comes down.

Summaries can be wrong

Report it from the paper page. We check it against the source and fix it.

07CONCLUSIONS:

Find out what the evidence says before your next session.

Free to search, three summaries a month, no card. Pro is a dollar and the first month is on us.