Abstract

Evidence syntheses can shape understanding and practice in health professions education, but their value depends on more than methodological credibility. Synthesis transforms findings from multiple studies and contexts into synthesized knowledge claims, creating a transferability challenge distinct from that of primary research. Review-level transferability concerns whether these claims can meaningfully inform understanding or action beyond the contexts represented in the evidence base, and what readers need to judge that fit. In this commentary, we propose three interrelated dimensions that can support transferability: conceptual and theoretical engagement, boundary clarity, and stakeholder relevance. We illustrate how deliberate attention to these dimensions throughout the review process can clarify what knowledge has been constructed, make visible the conditions and limits of its claims, and provide the contextual information users need to judge relevance. Designing for transferability can help synthesized knowledge travel across contexts without assuming universal applicability.