Table 2. Quality assessment of included studies for quantitative synthesis using MMAT.
MMAT = Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool; Y = yes; N = no; U = can’t tell
All studies going through quality assessment passed the screening questions: 1) Are there clear research questions? 2) Do the collected data allow us to address the research questions?
(Methodological quality criteria)
2.1. Is randomization appropriately performed? 2.2. Are the groups comparable at baseline? 2.3. Are there complete outcome data? 2.4. Are outcome assessors blinded to the intervention provided? 2.5 Did the participants adhere to the assigned intervention?
3.1. Are the participants representative of the target population? 3.2. Are measurements appropriate regarding both the outcome and intervention (or exposure)? 3.3. Are there complete outcome data? 3.4. Are the confounders accounted for in the design and analysis? 3.5. During the study period, is the intervention administered (or exposure occurred) as intended?
4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the research question? 4.2. Is the sample representative of the target population? 4.3. Are the measurements appropriate? 4.4. Is the risk of nonresponse bias low? 4.5. Is the statistical analysis appropriate to answer the research question?
| 2. Quantitative randomized controlled trials | Authors, year | Methodological quality criteria | |||||
| 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 2.5 | Score (%) | ||
| Curtis JR, et al., 2011 [26] | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 60 | |
| 3. Quantitative nonrandomized | Authors, year | Methodological quality criteria | |||||
| 3.1 | 3.2 | 3.3 | 3.4 | 3.5 | Score (%) | ||
| Wen FH, et al., 2023 [7] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| Curtis JR,, et al., 2008 [35] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| Lewis-Newby M, et al., 2011 [36] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| Levy CR, et al., 2004 [37] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| Glavan BJ, et al., 2008 [38] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| 4. Quantitative descriptive | Authors, year | Methodological quality criteria | |||||
| 4.1. | 4.2. | 4.3. | 4.4. | 4.5. | Score (%) | ||
| Kross EK, et al., 2014 [27] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| Khandelwal N, et al., 2014 [28] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| Han XP, et al., 2021 [29] | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | 80 | |
| Jensen HI, et al., 2015 [30] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| Gerritsen RT, et al., 2018 [31] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| Choi Y, et al., 2019 [32] | Y | Y | N | N | Y | 60 | |
| Mularski RA,, et al., 2004 [33] | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 100 | |
| Gerritsen RT, et al., 2017 [34] | Y | N | Y | N | Y | 60 | |
| Lee JJ, et al., 2016 [39] | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 80 | |
| Osborn TR, et al., 2012 [40] | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | 80 | |
| DeCato TW, et al., 2013 [41] | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 100 | |
| Gerritsen RT, et al., 2013 [42] | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 100 | |
| Vattanavanit V, et al., 2017 [43] | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 100 | |