Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Julia Koricheva, Jessica Gurevitch, and Kerrie Mengersen

Print publication date: 2013

Print ISBN-13: 9780691137285

Published to Princeton Scholarship Online: October 2017

DOI: 10.23943/princeton/9780691137285.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM PRINCETON SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.princeton.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Princeton University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in HSO for personal use (for details see http://www.universitypressscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 12 December 2017

Quality Standards for Research Syntheses

Quality Standards for Research Syntheses

Chapter:
(p.323) 20 Quality Standards for Research Syntheses
Source:
Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution
Author(s):

Hannah R. Rothstein

Christopher J. Lortie

Gavin B. Stewart

Julia Koricheva

Jessica Gurevitch

Publisher:
Princeton University Press
DOI:10.23943/princeton/9780691137285.003.0020

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.

Keywords:   quantitative research synthesis, meta-analysis, research practice, systematic review

Princeton Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.