Background The measurement, effects, and policy implications for social justice of gentrification continue to be a central but challenging issue in urban studies and planning, with considerable discussion about its significance. Despite the growing empirical interest, there is a lack of agreement regarding the definition and measurement of gentrification, which has led to a variety of findings and has complicated the scholarly and policy discourse.Objectives This study critically evaluates the quantitative methodologies applied to describe and measure gentrification in peer-reviewed literature. The objective is to identify methodological shortcomings, demonstrate current practices, and provide recommendations for future research.Methods Empirical data was used to operationalize gentrification in a systematic review of 179 quantitative studies published between 1973 and 2020. The theoretical framework, variable selection, spatial and temporal dimensions, data sources, and analytic approaches of each study were examined.Results The findings show significant variability in the operationalization of gentrification, including a dependence on decade-long intervals, census tract-level studies, and simple criteria. Few studies integrate supply and demand factors or use race as a key analytic component. Methodological complexity has increased in recent years, with more research using blended indicators and multivariate approaches, although inconsistencies and ambiguities remain. Mixed methods approaches and the incorporation of local context are underutilized.Conclusion To improve the rigor and comparability of gentrification research, future studies should use deeper and theoretically grounded measurement methodologies, describe methodological decisions transparently, and address spatial, temporal, and social issues more completely. Clearer standards for establishing and measuring gentrification are required for creating strong, policy-relevant study and informed urban planning practice.