Table 2.
Methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews.
| AMSTAR scale | Yes | No | Cannot answer or not applicable | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | n | % | |
| 1 | ||||||
| Research problem | 0 | 0 | 8 | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| Inclusion criteria | 8 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Exclusion criteria | 4 | 50 | 4 | 50 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 37.5 | 5 | 63.5 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 3 | ||||||
| Electronic sources | 8 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Search terms | 7 | 87.5 | 1 | 12.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Search strategy | 2 | 25 | 6 | 75 | 0 | 0 |
| Supplemented retrieval | 4 | 50 | 4 | 50 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 4 | ||||||
| Grey literature | 0 | 0 | 8 | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| Language restrictions | 4 | 50 | 4 | 50 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 100 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 6 | ||||||
| Characteristics | 4 | 50 | 4 | 50 | 0 | 0 |
| Table | 2 | 25 | 6 | 75 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 7 | 7 | 87.5 | 1 | 12.5 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 8 | 3 | 37.5 | 5 | 63.5 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 9 | 3 | 37.5 | 5 | 63.5 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 10 | 7 | 87.5 | 1 | 12.5 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| 11 | 1 | 12.5 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 87.5 |
Note. (1) Was an “a priori” design provided? (2) Were there duplicate study selection and data extraction? (3) Was a comprehensive literature search performed? (4) Was the status of publication (i.e., grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion? (5) Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided? (6) Were the characteristics of the included studies provided? (7) Was the scientific quality of the included studies assessed and documented? (8) Was the scientific quality of the included studies used appropriately in formulating conclusions? (9) Were the methods used to combine the findings of studies appropriate? (10) Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed? (11) Was the conflict of interests stated?