1. Get with the Program! Software tools to modernize systematic reviews and meta-analyses Joseph Lau, MD Byron Wallace, PhD Nira Hadar, MS Tufts EPC / Brown EPC

2. Some statistics about EPC evidence reports and comparative effectiveness reviews average time to complete ~15 months 2 to 3 person-years (5-7 team members) of effort $300K+ Screen 5,000 to 10,000 abstracts (one Tufts EPC report screened >30,000 abstracts) Include 100+ full text articles

3. 18,000 citations were screened for the cancer pain evidence report

4. Allen IE, Olkin I. Estimating time to conduct a meta-analysis from number of citations retrieved. JAMA 1999;282:634-35.

5. Impetus to modernize SR methods SR now 30 years old, however, most steps remain largely manual processes More requirements (stakeholder engagement), new standards (IOM report) to meet Powerful statistical methods appear but few are trained to implement them EPC program now 15 years old, time and $$ to complete reports have increased Desire for more, quicker turnaround, less costs Reports often need to be updated Unavoidable replications across the globe

6. CER Process Overview 6

7. Software tools developed by investigators at Tufts EPC / Brown EPC Abstrakr (R01, T. Trikalinos) – abstract screening OpenMeta-analyst (R01, C. Schmid) – Powerful software to perform meta-analyses SRDR (Tufts EPC) – Systematic Review Data Repository All currently available Open access software to facilitate conduct of systematic reviews and meta-analyses Funded by AHRQ