"I'm a graduate student at NC State University, and recently I tried out CMA for my lab. For the record, it is awesome. My lab, Meta World, is specifically focused on meta‐analysis, so we've used a lot of programs both good and bad. CMA is by far the best we've tried in terms of ease of use. It is simple enough for a first time meta‐analyst to use, but the best part is the diversity of options for the more advanced user. It is amazingly easy to switch effects models and other aspects, to the point that it's fun to fiddle around with things to see the difference they make. The options for output are everything you'd need for publication, and they look a good sight better than what I would have come up with without CMA. It is the only software that had all the functionality I needed for my thesis, and without it I would be stuck writing my own code."

Jennifer London - Doctoral Student in I/O Psychology, NC State University

"The program is a perfect companion to Borenstein et al's book since it allowed my students to try the concepts discussed in the book. We have done most of the computations by hand first and then checked our answers with CMA. This gave the students 'a feel' for meta‐analysis and made them realise that the method is not just about feeding some abstract numbers into a black box and getting a meaningless number at the end. Instead, using the book and the program together the students learned the maths behind the computations and the meaning of the final results. I found the help manual especially user‐friendly and ready for classroom use. My students were able to get most of the exercises done at home such that we had the time to discuss the answers and their implications in class."

Dr. Karina De Santis (PhD) - Lecturer in Statistics and Research Methods, Jacobs University, Bremen gGmbH School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Bremen, Germany