Best-Evidence Synthesis: An Alternative to Meta-Analytic and Traditional Reviews

Abstract

This paper proposes an alternative to both meta-analytic and traditional reviews. The method, “best-evidence synthesis,” combines the quantification of effect sizes and systematic study selection procedures of quantitative syntheses with the attention to individual studies and methodological and substantive issues typical of the best narrative reviews. Best-evidence syntheses focus on the “best evidence” in a field, the studies highest in internal and external validity, using well-specified and defended a priori inclusion criteria, and use effect size data as an adjunct to a full discussion of the literature being reviewed.