Revolutionizing Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis with Innovative Software Solutions

Session Type
Evidence synthesis innovations and technology
Maruyama EK1, Alves WEFM1, Souza GG1, Sugino RG1, Pedrosa MR2, da Silva AA3
1Universidade Santo Amaro, UNISA, Brazil
3Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, Brazil

Background: The process of conducting a systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis involves a meticulous and exhaustive evaluation of the most dependable evidence to address a specific inquiry. This process involves a series of pivotal steps, such as identifying pertinent studies, selecting suitable studies, collecting and evaluating data, assessing bias risk, combining outcomes, summarizing results, and formulating conclusions. Due to the vast number of studies involved, this process can be time-consuming. However, researchers can now rely on different software solutions to expedite and simplify the process of conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, making them more efficient and productive.
Objectives: This study aims to compare different software options that are accessible on the internet for the creation and management of systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses. Through an analysis of the distinctions and similarities among these tools, our objective is to offer a thorough assessment of their individual capabilities and features.
Methods: Our search for software programs to facilitate the preparation and maintenance of systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses led us to explore various online resources, including Google and SR-related blogs.
Results: Results The software programs found are RevMan, DistillerSR, Covidence, Rayyan, EPPI REVIEWR, SRBD.PRO, SUMARI, Mendeley, Abstrackr, OpenMeta, Metafor, Meta-analysis made easy, Stata, SRDR, CADIMA, SysRev, JBI summary tool, PICO Portal, Crownd-Care, DMetaR. Most of these tools are in English, free to use, and allow for the import and export of search results online. Some of them can also conduct quality assessments, extract data, and make final decisions regarding which studies to include or exclude. However, not all these tools provide a comprehensive guide for the meta-analysis process.
Conclusions: There are software programs available online that can simplify and speed up the SR and meta-analysis process, but it's imperative for all reviewers to adhere to the necessary steps to perform a high-quality SR and meta-analysis.
Patient, public and/or healthcare consumer involvement: Medical students