Objective: Systematic reviews are a useful tool to evaluate interventions to that have the potential to reduce racial health inequities. We aim to 1) assess methods to center racial health equity in evidence syntheses, and 2) assess the types of interventions evaluated for advancing racial health equity.Study design and methods: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane and Campbell databases for evidence syntheses that evaluated interventions focused on racialized populations to mitigate racial health inequities, published from January 2020 to January 2023.Results: We included 157 evidence syntheses focusing on racialized populations. Only 22 (14%) studies defined the role of racism in driving racial health inequities related to the review question. Only 6% (9) of reviews considered intersectionality. Two-thirds (105, 67%) descriptively reported each included study's findings rather than synthesizing them. Of those which quantified the size of effect, 54% (21) used biased synthesis methods such as vote counting. The most common type of method assessed was tailoring of interventions to meet needs of racialized populations.Conclusions: Systematic reviews focused on improving racial health equity often failed to investigate the root causes of racial health inequities. Their usefulness is further limited by poor analytical methods that may lead to biased or misleading conclusions.