A brief review of evidence is limited in time and/or scope compared to a comprehensive review. However, brief reviews are important not only in meeting the needs of policy makers and practitioners, but also in providing students and researchers with an overview of the evidence. In this paper we summarise and evaluate alternative methods for brief reviews, including: using strict inclusion criteria; reviewing only a sample of evidence and eliminating or reducing steps in the review process. We examine a sample of brief reviews and found that the majority did not meet the methodological standards of comprehensive reviews. We conclude by recommending some methodological standards for brief reviews.