Meta-analysis—the statistical analysis of a large collection of analysis results from individual studies for the purpose of integrating the findings substantially contributes to paradigm development in the field of entrepreneurship. Notably, a number of choices are made when conducting a meta-analysis. Many of these choices have implications for the interpretation of the results, affecting one of the core aims of meta-analysis, that is, to generate generalizable best evidence. To better understand meta-analysis evidence in the field of entrepreneurship it is essential to understand how these meta-analyses are conducted, what type of methodological choices have been made and communicated, and how these choices affect the interpretation of findings. To address these issues, we performed a content analysis of 90 meta-analyses up to 2021 and investigate 74 methodological choices made by the authors. We identify and offer suggestions for future practice in seven areas: the study location strategy, the use of a second coding, the assessment of heterogeneity, multivariate analysis, quality checks, the violation of assumptions, and the interpretation of meta-analytical findings. In so doing, we hope to contribute to best practices and to the legitimacy of validity generalization in the domain of entrepreneurship research. Moreover, we provide a comprehensive and evidence-based understanding of the interpretation and implications of meta-analysis practices for theory building and testing and scholarly impact.