Table 1.
Critical appraisal of eligible qualitative studies
| Study | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q5 | Q6 | Q7 | Q8 | Q9 | Q10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brown, et al. 201830 | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | U | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Eichler, et al. 201613 | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | U | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Eichler, et al. 202231 | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Feng, et al. 201918 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Forrest, et al. 200820 | N | U | U | U | U | N | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Lee, et al. 201417 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Morton, et al. 202233 | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Nepomuceno, et al. 201232 | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Pasquini, et al. 202119 | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Santos, et al. 201834 | N | Y | Y | Y | U | N | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Schwan, et al. 201916 | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y |
| Total % | 18 | 91 | 91 | 82 | 82 | 9 | 0 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Y, yes; N, no; U, unclear
JBI critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research.
Q1 = Is there congruity between the stated philosophical perspective and the research methodology?
Q2 = Is there congruity between the research methodology and the research question or objectives?
Q3 = Is there congruity between the research methodology and the methods used to collect data?
Q4 = Is there congruity between the research methodology and the representation and analysis of data?
Q5 = Is there congruity between the research methodology and the interpretation of results?
Q6 = Is there a statement locating the researcher culturally or theoretically?
Q7 = Is the influence of the researcher on the research, and vice-versa, addressed?
Q8 = Are participants and their voices adequately represented?
Q9 = Is the research ethical according to current criteria or, for recent studies, is there evidence of ethical approval by an appropriate body?
Q10 = Do the conclusions drawn in the research report flow from the analysis, or interpretation, of the data?