| 1. Presentation of the study objectives. |
9
18-26
|
0 |
0 |
| 2. Robustness of the design, considering the objective of the study. |
9
18-26
|
0 |
0 |
| 3. Is the sample heterogeneous? |
8
18-23,25,26
|
0 |
1
24
|
| 4. Was the sample drawn from an adequate population base representing the target population under investigation? |
7
18-23,25
|
2
24,26
|
0 |
| 5. Sample size justification. |
7
18-20,22,23,25,26
|
2
21,24
|
0 |
| 6. Report of sample representativeness/Is the sample representative? |
3
22,23,25
|
6
18-21,24,26
|
0 |
| 7. Is there a presentation of the number of non-respondents, with justifications? |
6
19,20,22,23,25,26
|
3
18,21,24
|
0 |
| 8. Is there a report of previous validation of the instrument used to measure screen time? |
1
23
|
8
18-22,24-26
|
0 |
| 9. Is there information that makes it possible to replicate the instrument used to measure low back pain? |
6
18-20,22,23,26
|
3
21,24,25
|
0 |
| 10. Is there a report of previous validation of the instrument used to measure low back pain? |
7
18-22,24,25
|
2
23,26
|
0 |
| 11. Is there information that makes it possible to replicate the instrument used to measure low back pain? |
9
18-26
|
0 |
0 |
| 12. Are the procedures used in the statistical analysis adequate? |
9
18-26
|
0 |
0 |
| 13. Is there an indication of who conducted the statistical analysis? |
0 |
9
18-26
|
0 |
| 14. Is there a strategy to control the most relevant confounding factors? |
9
18-26
|
0 |
0 |
| 15. Are data adequately described? |
9
18-26
|
0 |
0 |
| 16. Are results internally consistent? |
9
18-26
|
0 |
0 |
