Skip to main content
. 2024 Dec 30;29:633. doi: 10.1186/s40001-024-02162-2

Table 1.

Standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research paper checklist

Study Questions Score (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Stolze et al., 2000 [17] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 100
Schniepp et al., 2016 [18] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 100
Marques et al., 2017 [19] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 100
Allali et al., 2017 [20] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a P Y 94
Bovonsunthonchai et al., 2018 [21] Y Y Y P n/a n/a n/a Y n/a P Y n/a Y Y 89
Souza et al., 2018 [22] Y N Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y N n/a N Y 67
Lim et al., 2019 [23] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a N Y 89
Giannini et al., 2019 [24] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 100
Isik et al., 2019 [25] Y Y Y P n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 94
Ferrari et al., 2020 [26] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 100
Sun et al., 2020 [27] Y Y N N n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y N n/a Y Y 67
Griffa et al., 2020 [28] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 100
Morel et al., 2021 [29] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 100
Chunyan et al., 2021 [30] Y N Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a N Y 78
Matsuoka et al., 2022 [31] Y Y N N n/a Y n/a Y n/a Y N n/a Y Y 70
Chen et al., 2018 [32] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a N Y 89
Nikaido et al., 2018 [33] Y Y Y N n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a N Y 78
Kitade et al., 2018 [34] Y Y P Y n/a n/a n/a P n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 89
Song et al., 2018 [35] Y Y Y N n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y N n/a N Y 67
Baltateanu et al., 2019 [36] Y Y N N n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a N N n/a Y Y 50
Sundström et al., 2022 [37] Y Y N N n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 78
Gago et al., 2022 [38] Y Y N Y n/a n/a n/a N n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 78
Hülser et al., 2022 [39] Y Y P P n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 89
Hallqvist et al., 2022 [40] Y Y N N n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 78
Ferrari et al., 2022 [7] Y Y Y N n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 89
Giannini et al., 2023 [41] Y Y Y Y n/a n/a n/a Y n/a Y Y n/a Y Y 100
Mean 85.9

Studies presented in chronological order. The question numbers of the standardized instrument standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research paper checklist are as follows:

1 Question/objective sufficiently described?

2 Study design evident and appropriate?

3 Method of subject/comparison group selection or source of information/input variables described and appropriate?

4 Subject (and comparison group, if applicable) characteristics sufficiently described?

5 If interventional and random allocation was possible, was it described?

6 If interventional and blinding of investigators was possible, was it reported?

7 If interventional and blinding of subjects was possible, was it reported?

8 Outcome and (if applicable) exposure measure(s) well defined and robust to measurement/misclassification bias? Means of assessment reported?

9 Sample size appropriate?

10 Analytic methods described/justified and appropriate?

11 Some estimate of variance is reported for the main results?

12 Controlled for confounding?

13 Results reported in sufficient detail?

14 Conclusions supported by the results?

Y = yes; N = no; P = partial; n/a = not applicable

Y: yes (2 points); N: no (0 points); n/a: not applicable; P: partial (1 point)