Meta-analyses are systematic summaries of research that use quantitative methods to find the mean effect size (standardized mean difference) for interventions. Critics of meta-analysis point out that such analyses can conflate the results of low- and high-quality studies, make improper comparisons and result in statistical noise. All these…

This paper seeks to raise awareness among educational researchers and practitioners of some significant weaknesses and internal contradictions of randomised control trials (RCTs). Although critiques throughout the years from education scholars have pointed to the detrimental effects of this experimental approach on education practice and values,…

Network meta-analysis is a popular method to synthesize the information obtained in a systematic review of studies (e.g., randomized clinical trials) involving subsets of multiple treatments of interest. The dominant method of analysis employs within-study information on treatment contrasts and integrates this over a network of studies. One…

In this response, we first show that Simpson's proposed analysis answers a different and less interesting question than ours. We then justify the choice of prior for our Bayes factors calculations, but we also demonstrate that the substantive conclusions of our article are not substantially affected by varying this choice.

EBP -- evidence-based policy and practice -- has generated intense controversy. A rough continuum of positions can be discerned: At one pole are "tough-minded" commentators distinguished by their support of EBP; however, there are serious internal differences in this camp, for some regard randomised field trials (RFTs) as the gold…

A recent paper uses Bayes factors to argue a large minority of rigorous, large-scale education RCTs are "uninformative." The definition of "uninformative" depends on the authors' hypothesis choices for calculating Bayes factors. These arguably overadjust for effect size inflation and involve a fixed prior distribution,…

Background: The use of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in education has increased significantly over the last 15 years. However, their use has also been subject to sustained and rather trenchant criticism from significant sections of the education research community. Key criticisms have included the claims that: it is not possible to undertake…

This article defines the "critical realist review", a literature-based methodological approach to critical analysis of health care studies (or any discipline charged with social interventions) that is robust, insightful and essential for the complexities of twenty-first century evidence-based health and social care. We argue that this…

Most evaluators have embraced the goal of evidence-based practice (EBP). Yet, many have criticized EBP review systems that prioritize randomized control trials and use various criteria to limit the studies examined. They suggest this could produce policy recommendations based on small, unrepresentative segments of the literature and recommend a…