Meta-analysis360 runs a systematic review from protocol to forest plot, and every step is free when you do it by hand. AI help is there when the pile gets big, and every judgement stays yours.
A startup from Greece, founded by Christos Siargkas.
This page is designed to help you find out whether Meta-analysis360 is good and if it is the right choice for you.
A web-based platform that runs a systematic review and meta-analysis end to end: protocol, search, title and abstract screening, full-text screening, data extraction, pooling and forest plots. The whole pipeline is free to run by hand. Optional AI screening and extraction keep a written reason for every decision and the verbatim sentence and page for every extracted value, and a reviewer confirms or corrects each one.
Listed in
Meta-analysis pipeline
We offer every step of a meta-analysis / systematic review in our end to end pipeline.
AI screening
High recall AI screening that does not risk excluding a relevant study.
AI Data Extraction
Data extraction of included studies in an organized manner with the user in the loop
PRISMA flow diagram
Automatic generation of PRISMA flow diagram
Automatic meta-analysis
Automatic meta-analysis of the extracted data
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
Meta-analysis360 runs a whole systematic review and meta-analysis in one place, from the question and protocol to the pooled forest plot, and the whole pipeline is free to run by hand. What sets it apart is the record it keeps. When the AI helps, every screening suggestion comes with a written reason, and every extracted number is stored with the verbatim sentence and page it came from, so checking it means reading a quotation rather than redoing the work. The reviewer confirms or overrides each suggestion, and the platform records which decisions were the reviewer's and which were suggestions, so the audit trail can be shown to a journal.
Cost: the whole pipeline is free to run by hand, on two projects with unlimited collaborators, and only the AI help is paid. Much of the established review software is licensed by institutions or sold by subscription, which leaves out independent researchers, students and teams in lower-resource settings.
One place: the data extracted is the data that gets pooled, in the same project, so nothing is retyped into a separate statistics package.
A check you can do yourself: screening suggestions carry their reasons, extracted values carry their quotations, and uncertain records go to the reviewer rather than being excluded.
Evidence in the open: the screening has been re-run against published reviews and scored against their own lists of included studies. An included study was never lost.
People who carry out systematic reviews and meta-analyses: clinicians and health researchers, PhD and master's students working on their first review, and small review teams without an institutional licence for review software. Also the librarians and methodologists who support them, who use the free tools (a PRISMA 2020 flow diagram generator, a Cohen's kappa calculator, a PROSPERO protocol template) and the open methods curriculum without an account.
It started from a line drawn by someone who had done reviews by hand. Antonios Siargkas, a physician and evidence-synthesis researcher at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, knew which parts of a review are mechanical (the protocol scaffolding, the search strategy, the first pass over abstracts, the extraction grid) and which are judgement. The idea was to let software take the mechanical half and leave every methodological decision with the reviewer, with a record of each step that can be shown to a journal. Christos Siargkas, an engineer and artificial intelligence researcher, built the platform, and owns and runs it; Antonios reviews its methods as part of his research. The pipeline is free to run by hand because cost should not decide who gets to do a rigorous review. The platform is now being tested against published meta-analyses, with the results posted, limits included, at https://meta-analysis360.com/evidence
A web application built with Next.js and React in TypeScript, on a PostgreSQL database, hosted in the EU. The AI help uses large language models, sent only the study data each step needs. The pooling, the effect size conversions and the free calculators are the platform's own statistics code, so every number in a forest plot is computed, never generated.
We have collected here some useful links to help you find out if Meta-analysis360 is good.
Check the traffic stats of Meta-analysis360 on SimilarWeb. The key metrics to look for are: monthly visits, average visit duration, pages per visit, and traffic by country. Moreoever, check the traffic sources. For example "Direct" traffic is a good sign.
Check the "Domain Rating" of Meta-analysis360 on Ahrefs. The domain rating is a measure of the strength of a website's backlink profile on a scale from 0 to 100. It shows the strength of Meta-analysis360's backlink profile compared to the other websites. In most cases a domain rating of 60+ is considered good and 70+ is considered very good.
Check the "Domain Authority" of Meta-analysis360 on MOZ. A website's domain authority (DA) is a search engine ranking score that predicts how well a website will rank on search engine result pages (SERPs). It is based on a 100-point logarithmic scale, with higher scores corresponding to a greater likelihood of ranking. This is another useful metric to check if a website is good.
The latest comments about Meta-analysis360 on Reddit. This can help you find out how popualr the product is and what people think about it.
Do you know an article comparing Meta-analysis360 to other products?
Suggest a link to a post with product alternatives.
Is Meta-analysis360 good? This is an informative page that will help you find out. Moreover, you can review and discuss Meta-analysis360 here. The primary details have been verified within the last quarter. So they could be considered up to date. If you think we are missing something, please use the means on this page to comment or suggest changes. All reviews and comments are highly encouranged and appreciated as they help everyone in the community to make an informed choice. Please always be kind and objective when evaluating a product and sharing your opinion.
