Table 1. Analysis of the selected studies’ methodological quality (n = 10).
| Study | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | Total score for each study |
Mean of the 21 items for each study |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alia et al. (2013) | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 83 | 3.95 |
| Huffman et al. (2018) | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 79 | 3.76 |
| Langer et al. (2014) | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 80 | 3.80 |
| Lev et al. (2020) | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 77 | 3.66 |
| Laukkanen, Sääkslahti & Aunola (2020) | 4 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 73 | 3.47 |
| Saunders et al. (2012) | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 70 | 3.33 |
| Sterret et al. (2013) | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 89 | 4.23 |
| Verhees et al. (2020) | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 82 | 3.90 |
| Yaffe (2018) | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 82 | 3.90 |
| Yazeedi et al. (2021) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 78 | 3.71 |
| Study | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Present systematic review | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 88 | 4.38 |
Notes:
The numbers of the columns corresponded to the 21 items of the EACSH scale.
The study of this systematic review is not included within the 10 articles examined in this research, which is why it is specified (n = 10)
Items 1 to 4 evaluate the cover and summary. Items 5 to 7 examine the introduction. Items from 8 to 11 the methodology. Items 12 to 14 the results. Items from 15 to 17 the discussion. Item 18 the references. Item 19 the appendices. Items 20 and 21 style and format.
The quality of this systematic review is shown in bold.
1 = very low level; 2 = low level; 3 = medium level; 4 = medium-high level; and 5 = very high level.
- The title describes the essential topic of the article, it is simple and clear, attractive and brief, it has less than 16 words, it is centered and the words of more than four letters begin with a capital letter.
- The names of the authors are indicated after the title, the surnames are linked with a hyphen (unless it is a single surname), the institutional affiliation and the email of each author are added.
- The abstract is in Spanish and English and is presented with a maximum of 250 words (or the number of words allowed by the journal in which it is expected to be published). In addition, it briefly describes the problem, objective, methodology, main results and conclusions of the study.
- The number of keywords is between 4 and 8 (or within the range that allows the journal in which it is expected to publish), were extracted from a thesaurus of the discipline, are written in lower case, separated by a comma and in alphabetical order.
- It begins with some attractive paragraphs that present the relevance, justification, and context of the topic, focusing the reader on the problem of study and motivating them to read the article.
- A critical review is made of the main studies carried out on the problem, considering the purposes of the study, from the most general to the particular. Furthermore, it is based on paraphrased quotes in most cases, integrating recent information with historical information.
- The objectives are relevant, they are related to the problem of exposed research and are clearly written (they have a verb in the infinitive, object, subject and context of the study).
- The type of study carried out is described, for example, if it was quantitative, qualitative or mixed; the scope (descriptive or descriptive-correlational), the analysis logic used (deductive or inductive), and the time of completion of the investigation (cross-sectional or longitudinal).
- The participants are described, with elements such as: the size of the sample, the type of people who were part of the study and their data demographics, the way of obtaining the sample, and the criteria for inclusion and exclusion.
- The instrument or instruments used are described, indicating their authors and the data of validity and reliability that are possessed. If I dont know instruments were applied, then the collection technique of the data used in the study and how it was carried out.
- The techniques used for data analysis are described. Collected (statistical or qualitative techniques), as well as the ethical criteria applied
- The results are described in a systematic, organized and synthetic way, showing the most relevant and original aspects of the study, considering, as far as possible, the same order of the established purposes. They are organized from the most general to the most specific.
- Tables and figures are used to help synthesize, contextualize, clarify or illustrate the purposes of the study. The information contained in the tables and figures is not repeated in the text.
- Analyzes of the data are presented according to the type of study; For example, in quantitative descriptive studies it is common to use percentages, means and standard deviations, quartile analysis, mean differences, and regression analysis, etc.
- A conclusion is presented for each of the purposes of the study, based on the results obtained, and this conclusion is analyzed in detail by comparing it with similar studies, which support or dispute it, with a critical analysis.
- The most original or impactful contributions of the study, the possible practical applications of the results, and also the limitations of the research (for example, methodological difficulties, sampling deficiencies, problems with the research design, possible biases etc).
- Recommendations are provided for future studies, considering the experience of the research carried out, and taking into account trends in the area. As far as possible, this should be based on arguments and considering the proposals of other authors.
- All the references cited in the text are described, according to the APA style in its latest edition, or considering the standards of the journal in which the article is expected to be published. All references have DOI, or, failing that, the link where they can be downloaded.
- Appendices are presented when the type of study requires it, through extra information at the end of the article or through complementary files to the text (uploaded to the journal or in the form of links to external web pages). The information that goes in the appendices has not been published.
- The article follows the APA standards in its latest edition, or the standards of the journal in which it is expected to be published. In addition, it complies with the grammatical rules of the Spanish language. The writing is in an impersonal way, attractive from the beginning to the end, turning everything around the purposes of the study. Each paragraph is argumentative and consists of at least seven lines.
- The format is in accordance with the standards of the journal, whose considerations may be, in general terms: space and a half line spacing, 2.54 cm margins, Times New Roman 12 font and continuous numbering at the top right. The names of the authors or information that could identify them do not appear in the text.