Review platform
A review platform is the hosted application where processed documents are searched, read, coded, redacted and produced. It holds the searchable index, the coding decisions, the privilege and confidentiality designations, the audit trail of who did what, and the production tooling that writes images, native files and load files.
Also called: review tool · document review software · eDiscovery platform · review database · hosted review
Updated September 9, 2026
How does a review platform work?
Everything upstream of the platform prepares data for it. Collection acquires it, processing turns containers into documents with extracted text and metadata fields, and culling reduces what gets promoted. The platform is where people finally read things.
Four capabilities carry the workload. Search across text and fields, which is what the processing index exists to support. Review workflow, meaning batching, assignment, coding layouts and quality-control passes over other people’s decisions. Analytics, covering email threading, near-duplicate grouping and, where used, technology-assisted review. And production, which renders images, applies Bates numbers and legends, burns in redactions, and writes the load files.
Two properties matter more than any feature list. The audit trail records who viewed and coded what, and it is the thing a party relies on when the adequacy of a review is questioned. And the export, because a platform that cannot write a production to another party’s agreed specification cannot meet an ESI protocol it did not choose.
The tenancy model sits underneath all of it. A multi-tenant platform separates customers in software; a single-tenant deployment separates them in infrastructure. The distinction rarely changes the feature set and frequently changes what a client security questionnaire will accept.
What does a review platform look like in practice?
Where a matter’s data sits at each stage, and what the platform is responsible for:
| Stage | Held where | Platform’s job |
|---|---|---|
| Collected | Staging storage | Nothing yet |
| Processed | Index plus document store | Build the searchable index |
| Under review | Live workspace | Search, batching, coding, audit trail |
| Produced | Export volume | Endorse, redact, write DAT and OPT |
| Closed | Archive or exported out | Return the data and delete |
The last row is the one to negotiate first. Every other row is work the platform does for you; that one is work it does when you leave.
How does a review platform show up on an eDiscovery invoice?
The review platform is where most fee lines originate. Recurring per-GB monthly hosting covers keeping the workspace live. Per-seat user licenses charge by team size rather than by the vendor’s cost, and the Fee Field Guide notes that seat pricing penalizes exactly the moment you need to staff up. AI and analytics surcharges meter the features that reduce review hours. Export and production fees charge per event on the way out, and project management hours appear wherever the platform is not self-service.
That clustering is the reason platform choice drives cost more than any single rate. A self-service platform with analytics included and no seat limit produces a different invoice from a bureau-operated one at the same headline per-GB rate.
Worth asking: which tasks can my team run without vendor involvement, which analytics are in the base price, is there a platform-license option with no per-user charge, and what does it cost to export the full dataset at the end.
Sources
- EDRM, model stages for Processing, Review, Analysis and Production.
- The Sedona Conference, Commentary on Achieving Quality in the E-Discovery Process.
- Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(E) on the form of production a platform must be able to meet.
- Fee categories: the Fee Field Guide dataset.
Related terms
Hosting · Processing · Per-GB pricing · Technology-assisted review · Redaction · Document production
eDiscovery at one flat monthly rate
$3,250 a month on a 12-month agreement. No per-user fees and no per-GB hosting charges.
Common questions
What should a review platform do at minimum?
Search across extracted text and metadata fields; batch and assign documents to reviewers; record coding decisions with an audit trail; keep families and threads together; apply and burn in redactions; generate a privilege log; and export a production with images, native files, extracted text and DAT/OPT load files in a specified field order. A platform that cannot export to another vendor's specification is a platform you cannot leave.
What is the difference between a review platform and a service bureau?
The platform is the software. The service bureau is the people who operate it for you. Many providers sell both, which is why the distinction shows up on the invoice rather than in the product: a self-service platform lets your team run searches, batches and exports directly, while a bureau model routes those tasks through project managers billed by the hour. Ask which tasks you can do yourself before comparing rates.
Can a matter be moved from one review platform to another?
Yes, and the load file is what makes it possible. A full export of natives, images, extracted text and a DAT carrying every coding field can be loaded into another platform, though work product such as redaction coordinates, threading and analytics results does not always survive the move. Check the export formats and any data-return fee before a matter grows, not after.