Research Workflow Database
A single research proposal carried through literature review, ethics approval, data collection and analysis, manuscript writing, peer review, publication, and measured impact — with the team, documents, approvals, and history that go with it, all tracked together instead of scattered across email threads and shared drives.
Every stage hangs off the same research proposal, with a real progress readout on the proposal page — not a static checklist.
Not just a form for each stage — the parts that make a multi-person, multi-month project actually manageable.
A proposal-level team (who's working on this project) and manuscript-level authorship credit (contribution + order) — two different questions, tracked separately.
Every file lives in a polymorphic, multi-version library — upload a new version without ever losing the old one, restore any prior version, all fully downloadable.
A discussion thread on every record, a shared feed of who did what across the whole project, and personal notifications for mentions, assignments, and approvals.
Request approval on any record; the proposal's supervisor decides. A real progress bar on the proposal page reflects genuine stage completion, not just "a row exists."
Real SQL-aggregated numbers — pipeline funnel, publications over time, task completion, average days proposal-to-publication — plus CSV export everywhere.
Live Zotero and Mendeley sync, plus RIS/BibTeX import for EndNote and anything else — your literature review doesn't start from a blank page.
Deadlines and milestones sit alongside the 9 stages, with an upcoming/overdue widget on the dashboard so nothing quietly slips.
Field-level before/after history on every stage record — not just "what happened," but exactly what changed and who changed it.
Multi-institution support with departments, and access that's automatically scoped to your own institution where that matters.
From full platform administration down to read-only visibility for funders and outside monitors.