Four Best Practices for Meta-Analysis: A Systematic Review of Methodological Rigor in Mathematics Interventions for Students With or at Risk of Disabilities

Abstract

Meta-analysis methodology has evolved with the development of more robust statistical techniques; however, few reviews in special education have focused specifically on methodological rigor in meta-analyses. In this study, we examined 29 meta-analyses of mathematics interventions published from 2000 to 2022 to determine the extent to which researchers have applied four best practices in meta-analyses focused on mathematics interventions for students with disabilities. Our findings were (a) studies used three primary moderator techniques: meta-regression ( k = 10), subgroup analysis ( k = 8), analysis of variance ( k = 3), and both subgroup analysis and meta-regression ( k = 1); (b) only one study considered small sample corrections for hypothesis tests; (c) few researchers handled the dependence between multiple effect sizes ( k = 3); and (d) the funnel plot was commonly used to detect publication bias ( k = 8). Based on our findings, we make recommendations for methodological considerations for future meta-analyses.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 7 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.