This chapter presents guidelines to address the following questions: What makes a quantitative research synthesis good or flawed? How can authors improve the quality of their review at various stages in the process of planning and carrying out a research synthesis? What criteria can editors and reviewers use to assess whether a quantitative synthesis should be accepted for publication, revised, or rejected? How can readers of published syntheses determine how to evaluate the quality of what they are reading, and in doing so decide whether or not to trust its results and their interpretation? The guidelines are outlined in the order of the stages involved in conducting a synthesis. In addition to reviewing the questions that should be asked at each stage of the synthesis, the chapter also describes ways in which poor choices at each stage can compromise the integrity of the review; it also provides examples of good and poor practice.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 32 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.