Systematic reviews based on single-case experimental designs (SCED) are increasingly common in the scientific literature. However, researchers reviewing SCED research may employ varying approaches and strategies, not all of which correspond with recognized standards of review quality, including those specific to SCED. Furthermore, unique features of SCED may necessitate the development of new standards specific to research synthesis. In this article, we provide an overview of the current status and functions of systematic reviews in SCED research. We offer recommendations and guidance to novice and advanced researchers to support consistency, replicability, and transparency of systematic reviews that include SCED research.
Gilroy et al. (2026) studied this question.