A while ago, I read this thread. In addition to answering the question, a lot of responses discussed the quality and scholarship of several authors, and how some are better than others (an example from that thread being Reza Aslan vs. Fred Donner). As a layman history reader, how could I research which authors are more accurate/legitimate/up-to-date than others?
Some examples of books I was planning to read soon:
I read book reviews. If you're a college student or if you have access to library databases that offer peer-reviewed journal articles, most have the option to search for "articles only" and then to limit that search to only book reviews. Also, if you graduated from college within the last few years, your university might still let you log-in to their databases because it takes them a while to update that system (this is my experience at least). You can also find the same book reviews in other ways but that is how I find them.
You'll also find that recently published histories should go through the relevant existing literature on the same subject and add their points of view on those histories and discuss how their research aligns or disagrees with them. If you read enough on one subject you'll start to see who is viewed as crap/groundbreaking/trustworthy/accurate.
You might find this previous thread helpful!