Reconsidering what makes syntheses of psychological intervention studies useful

Abstract

Syntheses of literature on psychological interventions have defined the state of knowledge and helped to identify evidence-based practices for researchers, practitioners, educators and policymakers. Nevertheless, it is complicated to appraise the usefulness of syntheses owing to long-standing methodological issues and the rapid rate of research production. In this Perspective, we examine how syntheses of psychological interventions could be more useful. We argue that syntheses should move beyond the myopic lens of intervention impact based on a one-time, contested selection of literature and comprehensible only to intensively trained readers. Rather, syntheses should become ‘living’ documents that integrate data on intervention impact, consistency, research credibility and sampling inclusivity, all of which must then be presented in a modular way that is also accessible to people of limited expertise. Although existing resources make pursuit of this goal possible, reaching it will require a dramatic change in the ways in which psychologists collaborate and in which syntheses are conducted, disseminated and institutionally supported. Traditional syntheses are limited by methodological issues and the rapid rate of research production. In this Perspective, Sakaluk et al. propose a model for more useful syntheses that integrate data on impact, consistency, research credibility and sampling inclusivity and present these data in a modular and accessible way.