Table 2.
Study quality of included studies
| Published papers—EPHPP quality assessment tool for quantitative studies | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author (Year) | A. Selection BIAS | B. Study design | C. Confounders | D. Blinding | E. Data collection methods | F. Withdrawals & drop-outs | Global rating* |
| Celia et al. (2022) | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Strong |
| Cerutti et al. (2022) | Strong | Moderate | Strong | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Strong |
| Cook et al. (2019) | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Moderate | Moderate |
| Grudin et al. (2022) | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Moderate |
| Garnefski and Kraaij (2023) | Moderate | Moderate | Weak | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate |
| Harra and Vargas (2023) | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Moderate | Strong | Moderate | Strong |
| Hennemann et al. (2022a) | Strong | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Strong |
| Hennemann et al. (2022b) | Strong | Strong | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Strong |
| Juniar et al. (2022) | Strong | Moderate | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate |
| Karyotaki et al. (2022) | Strong | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Moderate |
| Keinonen et al. (2021) | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Strong |
| Klimczak et al. (2023) | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Moderate | Moderate |
| Küchler et al. (2023) | Strong | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Strong |
| Lappalainen et al. (2021) | Weak | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Weak |
| Lappalainen et al. (2023) | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate |
| Novella et al. (2022) | Strong | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Moderate |
| O'Connor et al. (2020) | Strong | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Moderate | Strong |
| O'Connor et al. (2022) | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Weak |
| Pescatello et al. (2021) | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Strong | Weak | Weak |
| Peynenburg et al. (2022) | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Moderate | Moderate |
| Radomski et al. (2020) | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Moderate | Weak | Weak |
| Radovic et al. (2021) | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Moderate | Moderate |
| Ravaccia et al. (2022) | Moderate | Moderate | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Weak |
| Rice et al. (2020) | Moderate | Moderate | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Moderate |
| Rodriguez et al. (2021) | Strong | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate |
| Schueller et al. (2019) | Strong | Moderate | Weak | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Moderate |
| Sit et al. (2022) | Moderate | Moderate | Weak | Moderate | Moderate | Weak | Weak |
| Stapinski et al. (2021) | Strong | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Moderate | Strong |
| Sun et al. (2022) | Moderate | Strong | Weak | Moderate | Strong | Strong | Moderate |
| van Doorn et al. (2022) | Moderate | Moderate | Weak | Moderate | Moderate | Strong | Moderate |
| Unpublished papers—AACODS Checklist | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authority | Accuracy | Coverage | Objectivity | Date | Significance | % | |
| Koltz (2022) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 100 = Low risk of bias |
| Wahlund (2022) | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 83.33 = Low risk of bias |
Published *Criteria for global rating; 1. Strong = no weak ratings; 2. Moderate = one weak rating; 3. Weak = two or more weak ratings. Unpublished: Criteria for risk of bias: (1) low risk of bias (75% of quality criteria met); (2) moderate risk of bias (> 50% of quality criteria met, and (3) high risk of bias (< 50% quality criteria met)