I have found Scopus AI from Elsevier and Research Assistant from Clarivate very useful. The only problem is that they need subsciption.

These days, AI web scraping and summarizing tools are incredibly powerful and may vastly expedite literature review processes. However, without carefully verifying the information provided, this can be very risky. Verifying AI-sourced information can mean manually reading papers or segments of interest that the AI recommends, and rigorously prompting the AI tool to deeply back up its statements, when relevant. (I highly recommend both.) For example, consider prompting the AI to justify its point using specific phrases from the text that you can then manually verify were not hallucinated. Be sure to check that your AI tool didn't ignore parts of the text that may have contradicted its previous points, as current tools sometimes do!

Digital tools are undeniably useful and can significantly streamline the literature review process by saving time on searching, organizing, and analyzing sources. However, it's equally important to dedicate time to understanding the literature review process thoroughly. This deeper engagement helps ensure that we fully grasp the nuances and context of the research. Relying solely on digital tools risks overlooking the critical thinking and analytical aspects that are the soul of effective research.

Yes, digital tools like citation managers (Zotero, EndNote), AI-powered research assistants (ResearchRabbit, Elicit), and databases with advanced search filters (Google Scholar, PubMed) can streamline the literature review process by organizing references, summarizing articles, and identifying relevant studies faster.