Learning From Reviews of Early Intervention

Abstract

Reviews of the literature are frequently advocated to advance knowledge in the social sciences. Unfortunately, most reviewers do not explicitly consider or attempt to learn from what previous reviewers of the same or closely related topics have done. This omission is inconsistent with good scientific practice and is significantly detrimental to advancing knowledge. Using 52 previous reviews of the early intervention efficacy literature as an example, this article demonstrates the value of systematically considering previous reviews before initiating a new review. The results establish a foundation that should be particularly helpful to future reviewers of the early intervention efficacy literature and demonstrate a process that should be used by reviewers in all areas.