Background: Understanding of data‐reporting methods is imperative for correct interpretation of the medical literature as well as for proper performance of future clinical research. Recent developments in biostatistics have greatly changed the types of statistical analyses used and the minimum quality standards that must be maintained. Method: Different types of review are described, including systematic review with and without meta‐analysis. Minimum reporting standards, sources of bias, both quantitative and qualitative, and references are discussed. Results and Conclusion: Meta‐analysis has become a clearly defined technique, with reporting standards for both randomized controlled trials and observational studies. It is assuming a wider role in the surgical literature. Although many sources of bias exist, there are clear reporting standards and readers should be aware of these when studying the literature. Copyright © 2006 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Surgeons must learn to evaluate science