====== JASP ======

=== 🧱 Overpromised Accessibility, Underdelivered Depth ===

JASP markets itself as a user-friendly GUI for statistical analysis, but this ease of use comes at the cost of **limited methodological depth and flexibility**.

  * The simplified interface encourages **black-box application** of statistics without fostering true understanding.
  * Advanced users find the software **restrictive**, lacking support for custom models, complex data structures, and scripting.
  * The default settings and automated procedures may **lead novices to misuse or misinterpret results**.

=== 🔍 Limited Statistical and Meta-Analytic Features ===

  * While JASP supports basic meta-analysis, it **lacks advanced capabilities** such as network meta-analysis, multivariate models, and robust meta-regression.
  * The Bayesian methods implemented are **simplistic** and do not cover the breadth needed for nuanced inference.
  * Diagnostic tools for heterogeneity, publication bias, and influence analyses are **basic or missing**.

=== 🤖 No Integration with Automation or Data Extraction Tools ===

  * JASP operates in isolation, with **no built-in support for literature screening, data extraction, or risk of bias assessment**.
  * It offers **no API or scripting interface**, limiting reproducibility and workflow automation.
  * Collaboration features are minimal or nonexistent.

=== 📉 Reproducibility and Transparency Issues ===

  * Although JASP allows export of analysis scripts, the lack of full scripting limits transparency compared to command-line alternatives.
  * Version control and project management features are weak, hindering collaborative reproducible research.
  * Output reports are standardized but **offer limited customization**.

=== ⚠️ Accessibility vs. Professionalism Trade-Off ===

  * JASP’s low barrier to entry can foster **overconfidence among inexperienced users**, increasing risk of analytical errors.
  * Professional statisticians and methodologists often reject JASP due to its **limited scope and control**.
  * The software’s popularity in teaching may not translate to rigorous research environments.

=== 🧨 Final Verdict ===

JASP is a **convenient tool for introductory statistics and teaching**, but it is **unsuitable for complex, high-stakes meta-analyses or advanced research**. Its **simplistic interface, limited features, and poor integration** hinder rigorous evidence synthesis and reproducibility.

**Recommendation:** Use JASP for learning or exploratory data analysis only. For robust meta-analytic work, prefer more flexible and transparent tools like R packages or advanced workflow platforms.


====== Better Alternatives to JASP ======

=== 🥇 R with Meta-Analysis Packages (metafor, meta, netmeta) ===
  * ✅ Full scripting flexibility for complex and customized meta-analyses
  * ✅ Supports network meta-analysis, multivariate models, and Bayesian methods
  * ✅ Integrates with R Markdown for reproducible research reports
  * ➕ **Why better than JASP:**  
    Greater control, transparency, and methodological sophistication

=== 🔍 Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) ===
  * ✅ User-friendly GUI tailored to meta-analysis
  * ✅ Supports subgroup and sensitivity analyses and other advanced features
  * ✅ Widely used in clinical research with strong support
  * ➕ **Why better than JASP:**  
    More focused and feature-rich for meta-analytic purposes

=== 🤖 AI-Augmented Tools: Elicit + RobotReviewer ===
  * ✅ Automate literature screening, data extraction, and bias assessment
  * ✅ Reduce manual workload and increase accuracy
  * ➕ **Why better than JASP:**  
    Streamlines upstream review tasks typically manual in JASP workflows

=== 🔧 Systematic Review Platforms: Covidence, DistillerSR ===
  * ✅ Manage full systematic review workflow: screening, extraction, bias assessment, export
  * ✅ Collaboration-friendly with version control and audit trails
  * ➕ **Why better than JASP:**  
    Supports entire review lifecycle, not just statistical analysis

=== 📊 Summary Table ===

^ Tool                        ^ Strengths                                    ^ Why Better Than JASP                         ^
| R (metafor, meta, netmeta) | Advanced scripting, flexibility, reproducibility | Maximum control and transparency             |
| Comprehensive Meta-Analysis | GUI with rich meta-analytic features             | More advanced and focused than JASP           |
| Elicit + RobotReviewer      | AI-assisted extraction and bias assessment       | Automates and accelerates manual processes     |
| Covidence / DistillerSR     | Full systematic review management                  | Manages complete SR workflow collaboratively    |

=== 🧠 Final Recommendation ===
  * Use **[[R packages]]** for advanced and reproducible meta-analyses.
  * Use **[[CMA]]** for GUI-driven, feature-rich meta-analysis.
  * Use **[[Elicit]] and [[RobotReviewer]]** to automate evidence extraction and bias assessment.
  * Use **[[Covidence]] or [[DistillerSR]]** to manage the entire systematic review process.
  * Use **[[JASP]]** primarily for teaching and simple exploratory analyses.