Table 2

Quality appraisal of included studies

JBI toolAuthor(s), yearQ1Q2Q3Q4Q5Q6Q7Q8Q9%Quality appraisal
Quasi-experimental studiesAlexander and Allen (2011)33YNN*NNYYNN44Low
Baird et al (2019)42YNN*NNYYNN44Low
Davies et al (2017)43YNN*NYYYNN56Moderate
Joslin et al (2015)45YYN*NNYYNN56Moderate
Liaw and Goh (2018)46YNN*NNYYNY56Moderate
Madu et al (2021)54YNN*NNYYNN44Low
Pinnington et al (2016)47YNN*NNYYNN44Low
Vincent and Mahendiran (2015)49YNN*NNYYNN44Low
Wakeling (2011)40YNN*NNYYNN44Low
Walker et al (2012)41YNN*NNYYNN44Low
Zhu et al (2018)50YNN*NNYYYN56Moderate
Yang et al (2019)51YNN*NNYYNN44Low
Q1: Is it clear in the study what is the cause and what is the effect? Q2: Were the participants included in any comparisons similar? Q3: Were the participants included in any comparisons receiving similar treatment/care other than the exposure or intervention of interest? *Note: ‘No’ is considered good. Q4: Was there a control group? Q5: Were there multiple measurements of the outcome both before and after the intervention/exposure? Q6: Was follow-up complete, and if not, were differences between groups in terms of their follow-up adequately described and analysed? Q7: Were the outcomes of participants included in any comparisons measured in the same way? Q8: Were outcomes measured in a reliable way? Q9: Was appropriate statistical analysis used?
PrevalenceAitken et al32YYNYYYYNY78Moderate
Asfour52YYNNYYYNY67Moderate
Davies et al (2019)44YYNYYYYNY78Moderate
Diacon and Bell34YYYNYYYNY78Moderate
Eastwood et al35YYNYYYYNY78Moderate
Herrod et al36YYNYYYYNY78Moderate
Lim et al53YYYYYYYNY89High
Møller et al37YYYYYYYYY100High
Perren et al38YYNYNYYNN56Moderate
Szmuda et al39YYNYYYYNY78Moderate
Tura et al48YYYYYYYNY89High
Q1: Was the sample frame appropriate to address the target population? Q2: Were study participants sampled in an appropriate way? Q3: Was the sample size adequate? Q4: Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail? Q5: Was the data analysis conducted with sufficient coverage of the identified sample? Q6: Were valid methods used for the identification of the condition? Q7: Was the condition measured in a standard, reliable way for all participants? Q8: Was there appropriate statistical analysis? Q9: Was the response rate adequate, and if not, was the low response rate managed appropriately?
  • *'No' is considered good

  • JBI, Joanna Briggs Institute; N, no; Y, yes.