Cited by 552Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsPsychology Research and Bibliometricsscientometrics and bibliometrics research

A brief history of research synthesis

Open access
Chalmers, Iain, Hedges, Larry V., Cooper, Harris·2002·Evaluation & the Health Professions

Abstract

Science is supposed to be cumulative, but scientists only rarely cumulate evidence scientifically. This means that users of research evidence have to cope with a plethora of reports of individual studies with no systematic attempt made to present new results in the context of similar studies. Although the need to synthesize research evidence has been recognized for well over two centuries, explicit methods for this form of research were not developed until the 20th century. The development of methods to reduce statistical imprecision using quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis) preceded the development of methods to reduce biases, the latter only beginning to receive proper attention during the last quarter of the 20th century. In this article, the authors identify some of the trends and highlights in this history, to which researchers in the physical, natural, and social sciences have all contributed, and speculate briefly about the "future history" of research synthesis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0163278702025001003

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 127 · Cited by 552

Authors
Chalmers, I., Hedges, L. V., & Cooper, H.
Affiliations
  • Cochrane (GB)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • University of Missouri (US)
Venue
Evaluation & the Health Professions
Published
2002-03
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
12-37
ISSN
  • 0163-2787 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3918
OpenAlex
W2163834848
Cited by
552
References
127
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 21
FWCI
18.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Evaluation & the Health Professions (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DukeSpace (Duke University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Keywords
evidence synthesis, meta-analysis, bias mitigation, cumulative evidence, research utilization
MeSH terms
Research, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Bias, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, History, 19th Century, History, 20th Century

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review