Researchers have studied the behaviours of recreational fishers and conducted science to support recreational fisheries management for over 50 years, resulting in a large volume of literature. Yet, evidence users (e.g., practitioners and fishery managers) rarely have the time to sift through and reconcile the literature, leading to biased approaches from selective use of evidence. To help evidence users make sense of these studies in a manner that minimizes bias, various evidence synthesis methods can be used. However, these methods are not all robust, can themselves be subject to bias, and their uncritical use could lead to poor management decisions and outcomes. Evidence synthesis has been applied in recreational fisheries management in several contexts (e.g., to understand how social–ecological systems theory applies to recreational fisheries; to evaluate the effectiveness of angler gear choice on biological outcomes for fish or the impact of recreation angling on other taxa than fish), yet is often conducted using less rigorous, informal synthesis methodologies. By contrast, meta-analysis to support stock assessment is reasonably common, but these approaches are uncommon in recreational fisheries. Here, we briefly review the suite of evidence-synthesis methods available, consider their strengths and weaknesses, and outline key steps involved in their conduct. We explore synthesis methods including traditional narrative literature reviews, systematic maps, rapid evidence syntheses, (quantitative) meta-analysis, and systematic reviews (which often include meta-analysis). In doing so, we also briefly review past evidence syntheses on this topic and summarize ways in which evidence synthesis can be best used to support recreational fisheries management in the future.