Skip to main content
. 2026 Mar 19;9(3):583–591. doi: 10.31662/jmaj.2025-0435

Table 2.

Methodological Quality Assessment Using MMAT (2018 Version).

First author (year) Study design Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5
Thompson-Hodgetts et al. (2024) (28) MM Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Watanabe (2024) (20) QUAL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Watanabe (2023) (32) QUAL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Watanabe (2022) (19) QUAL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Watanabe (2022) (33) QUAL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sakamoto et al. (2022) (24) QUAN-NR Can’t tell Yes Yes No Yes
Sakamoto et al. (2022) (25) QUAN-NR Can’t tell Yes Yes No Yes
Otomo et al. (2022) (31) QUAL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Wenzel et al. (2020) (29) QUAN-NR Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Higuchi et al. (2019) (30) QUAN-NR Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Okuta and Ono (2019) (34) QUAN-DES Yes No Can’t tell No Can’t tell
Takeuchi et al. (2018) (22) QUAN-DES Can’t tell No Can’t tell No Can’t tell
Otomo et al. (2017) (27) MM Can’t tell Yes Yes No Can’t tell
Higuci et al. (2017) (26) QUAN-DES Can’t tell No Yes No Yes
Townsend et al. (2017) (35) QUAL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Onohara et al. (2014) (23) QUAN-DES Can’t tell No No No Can’t tell
Narita et al. (2013) (21) QUAL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Kiya (2001) (36) QUAN-DES Can’t tell No Can’t tell No Can’t tell

This table summarizes the methodological quality assessment of the included studies, presenting study design classifications and ratings for the five MMAT criteria (Q1-Q5). Assessment outcomes are indicated as Yes, No, or Can’t tell. The full wording of each MMAT criterion (Q1-Q5) is provided in the Supplementary Material. ‘Can’t tell’ ratings primarily reflect insufficient reporting of methodological details in the original publications rather than fundamental design flaws.

MMAT, Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool

MM: mixed-methods; Q1-Q5: MMAT methodological quality criteria; QUAL: qualitative; QUAN-DES: quantitative descriptive; QUAN-NR: non-randomized quantitative.