<p>Systematic literature reviews are essential for synthesizing scientific knowledge, enabling researchers to identify gaps and develop a comprehensive understanding of their fields. However, the exponential growth in scientific output presents significant challenges for selecting relevant studies. While various methodologies emphasize procedural transparency, many lack objective and customizable criteria for prioritizing studies within extensive bibliographic portfolios. Methodi Ordinatio was a pioneering effort in this regard, offering a prioritization model based on fixed bibliometric indicators such as impact factor, citation count, and publication year. Nevertheless, the uniform application of these metrics may limit its suitability across diverse research areas and objectives. To address this limitation, this article proposes AlphaHReview, an integrated multi-criteria approach that combines the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with Weitendorf Normalization (WN) to systematically classify and select publications. The method enables researchers to define and weight tailored evaluation criteria, adapting the review process to specific thematic contexts and research goals. A case study based on a Scopus portfolio of 11 articles published between 2014 and 2024 illustrates its practical application, highlighting adaptability and reproducibility. By integrating decision-making techniques with normalization procedures, AlphaHReview promotes an innovative methodology for ranking publications. Its versatility across disciplines reinforces its potential as a robust tool for navigating the complexities of contemporary scientific literature.</p>