Table 2. Quality Assessment of Studies using Qualitative Methodology.

	Quality assessment form itema
First author, year	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	Study sum	Ratiob	Quality of study
Greenberg [30], (1991)	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	7	0,35	Low
Quin [36], (2005)	1	2	2	1	2	1	1	0	1	0	11	0,55	Mod
Item sum	2	3	3	2	3	2	1	0	2	0
Ratioc	0,5	0,75	0,75	0,5	0,75	0,5	0,25	0	0,5	0
Quality of all studies on item	Mod	High	High	Mod	High	Mod	Low	Low	Mod	Low

Note. Item description: A; question/objective clearly described, B; design evident and appropriate to answer study question, C; context for the study is clear, D; connection to a theoretical framework/wider body of knowledge, E; sampling strategy described, relevant and justified, F; data collection methods clearly described and systematic, G; data analysis clearly described, complete and systematic, H; use of verification procedure to establish credibility of the study, I; conclusions supported by result, J; reflexivity of the account, Mod  =  moderate.

^aFull information regarding scoring, se corresponding item in QUALSYST [26].

^bRatio between total score for each study and maximum total score. Ratio <0.5 was assessed as low quality, 0.5–0.75 as moderate quality, and >0.75 as high quality.

^cRatio between sum of item score and maximum item score. Ratio <0.5 was assessed as low quality, 0.5–0.75 as moderate quality, and >0.75 as high quality.