Chart 5.

Methodological quality assessment (risk of bias) corresponding to the randomized clinical trials, according to the checklist for randomized controlled trials tool made available by the JBI.

Studies conducted with/in:	Identification	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5	Q6	Q7	Q8	Q9	Q10	Q11	Q12	Q13	“Yes” Score	Methodological quality	Risk of bias
Patients	Marik et al. (23)	?	+	+	-	+	+	+	NA	+	+	?	+	+	75%	High	Low
Healthcare professionals	Anderson et al. (34)	?	?	+	+	-	+	+	+	+	+	?	+	+	69,2%	Moderate	Moderate
	Everson et al. (36)	?	?	+	-	-	-	?	+	+	+	?	+	+	46.2%	Low	High
	Boutin et al. (37)	+	?	+	+	-	-	?	+	+	+	?	?	+	53.8%	Moderate	Moderate
	Burden et al. (38)	+	?	?	-	-	-	+	+	+	+	?	+	+	53.8%	Moderate	Moderate
	Bearman et al. (39)	?	?	+	+	-	+	+	-	-	+	?	+	+	53.8%	Moderate	Moderate
	Romanò et al. (40)	?	?	+	+	-	+	?	+	+	+	?	+	+	61.5%	Moderate	Moderate
Inanimate environments of healthcare	Wilson et al. (43)	+	?	?	+	-	-	?	-	+	+	?	+	+	46.2%	Low	High

Q1: Was true randomization used for assignment of participants to treatment groups?; Q2: Was allocation to treatment groups concealed?; Q3: Were treatment groups similar at the baseline?; Q4: Were participants blind to treatment assignment?; Q5: Were those delivering treatment blind to treatment assignment?; Q6: Were outcomes assessors blind to treatment assignment?; Q7: Were treatment groups treated identically other than the intervention of interest?; Q8: Was follow up complete and if not, were differences between groups in terms of their follow up adequately described and analyzed?; Q9: Were participants analyzed in the groups to which they were randomized?; Q10: Were outcomes measured in the same way for treatment groups?; Q11: Were outcomes measured in a reliable way?; Q12: Was appropriate statistical analysis used?; Q13: Was the trial design appropriate, and any deviations from the standard RCT design (individual randomization, parallel groups) accounted for in the conduct and analysis of the trial?; (+): Yes; (−): No; (?): Unclear; (NA): Not Applicable.