Table 2.

Quality and risk of bias assessment of individual studies

No	Checklists	Were the samples representative?	Was the sample size adequate?	Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?	Was appropriate statistical analysis used?	Were confounding factors identified?	Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated?	Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way?	Was the response rate acceptable	Overall appraisal score
1	Tsegaye et al. [28]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
2	Abebe T et al. [18]	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	6
3	Hanna D et al. [8]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	7
4	Tarkie et al. [27]	1	1	1	1	N/A	N/A	1	N/A	5
5	Hunchak et al. [24]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	N/A	7
6	Woyessa A et al. [29]	1	1	1	1	N/A	N/A	1	1	6
7	Abebe F et al. [17]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
8	Dode et al. [21]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
9	Jofira et al. [25]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
10	Habte T et al. [19]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
11	Agerie et al. [30]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
12	Fitsumbirhan et al. [23]	1	1	1	1	N/A	N/A	1	N/A	5
13	Fikadu A et al. [22]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
14	Birhan et al. [20]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
15	Mamo et al. [26]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
16	Tesfaye et al. [32]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
17	Nigussie et al. [31]	1	1	1	1	N/A	N/A	1	1	6

Note 1 = Yes 0 = No U = Unclear N/A = Not applicable