Table 2.
Quality appraisal
| Reference | Data collection | Representativeness | Exposure: immigration | Outcome: Chronic pain | Study design | Total | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Kesh 2021 [12] |
0 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -4 | poor |
| Strømme 2020 [13] | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | high |
| Strømme 2020 [14] | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | high |
| Rosenkrands 2020 [15] | 0 | -1 | -1 | 0 | -1 | -3 | low |
|
Dragioti 2020 [16] |
0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | excellent |
| Waxenegger 2017 [17] | 0 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 1 | moderate |
| Pfortmueller 2016 [18] | 0 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 0 | moderate |
|
Führer 2016 [19] |
0 | 0 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -3 | low |
| Teodorescu 2015 [20] | 0 | -1 | 0 | 1 | -1 | -1 | moderate |
|
Carneiro 2012 [21] |
-1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | moderate |
|
Kurita 2012 [22] |
0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | excellent |
Individual domain score: low -1, adequate 0, high 1;
Total score: poor (-5, -4), low (-3, -2), moderate (-1, 0, 1), high (2, 3), excellent (4, 5)