Chart 4.
Methodological quality assessment (risk of bias) corresponding to the quasi-experimental studies and non-randomized clinical trials, according to the Checklist for Quasi-Experimental Studies (Non-Randomized Experimental Studies) tool made available by the JBI.
| Studies conducted with/in: | Identification | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q5 | Q6 | Q7 | Q8 | Q9 | “Yes” Score | Methodological quality | Risk of bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patients | Balachandran et al. (24) | + | ? | + | + | + | NA | + | ? | + | 75% | High | Low |
| Madden et al. (25) | + | ? | - | - | + | NA | - | ? | + | 37.5% | Low | High | |
| Butler (26) | + | ? | + | - | + | NA | + | ? | + | 62.5% | Moderate | Moderate | |
| Marcus et al. (27) | + | + | + | + | + | NA | + | ? | + | 87.5% | High | Low | |
| Tahir et al. (28) | + | + | ? | + | - | + | + | ? | ? | 55.6% | Moderate | Moderate | |
| Argirova et al. (29) | + | ? | ? | + | + | + | + | ? | + | 66.7% | Moderate | Moderate | |
| Openshaw et al. (30) | + | ? | ? | - | + | NA | + | ? | + | 50% | Moderate | Moderate | |
| Lazary et al. (31) | + | + | + | - | + | NA | + | ? | + | 75% | High | Low | |
| Gabbay et al. (32) | + | + | ? | - | - | + | + | ? | + | 55.6% | Moderate | Moderate | |
| Healthcare professionals | Salazar-Vargas et al. (33) | + | + | ? | - | + | + | + | ? | + | 66.7% | Moderate | Moderate |
| Condò et al. (35) | + | ? | ? | + | + | ? | + | ? | ? | 44.4% | Low | High | |
| Groß et al. (41) | + | + | ? | - | + | + | + | ? | + | 66.7% | Moderate | Moderate | |
| Renaud et al. (42) | + | + | ? | + | - | ? | + | ? | + | 55.6% | Moderate | Moderate | |
| Inanimate environments of healthcare | Luk et al. (44) | + | ? | ? | + | + | - | + | ? | + | 55.6% | Moderate | Moderate |
| Kotsanas et al. (45) | + | NA | NA | - | + | + | NA | ? | NA | 60% | Moderate | Moderate |
Q1: Is it clear in the study what is the “cause” and what is the “effect” (i.e., there is no confusion about which variable comes first)?; 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?; Q4: Was there a control group?; Q5: Were there multiple measurements of the outcome both pre and post the intervention/exposure?; Q6: Was follow up complete and if not, were differences between groups in terms of their follow up adequately described and analyzed?; 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?; (+): Yes; (−): No; (?): Unclear; (NA): Not Applicable.