"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

"My experience with Comprehensive Meta‐analysis is highly positive. The spreadsheet interfaces for data entry are very intuitive. They handle an astonishing wide array of indices and formats for effect sizes, including the possibility of entering them in the spreadsheet by copy‐and‐paste. The exploratory phase is easily performed thanks to a variety of facilities, as cumulative meta‐analysis, sensitivity analysis by the “one‐study‐removed” procedure, and subgroup analysis, among others. It covers all basic fixed and random effect models and provides high‐quality graphical outputs for reports. The tutorial and the manual are really helpful and friendly. In short, Comprehensive Meta‐analysis is my favorite tool both for performing and teaching meta‐analysis."

Professor Juan Botella - Autonomous University of Madrid