Table 4. Qualitative quality assessment led by the CASP assessment.
| Study reference by first author | A) Aims | B) Methodology | C) Appropriateness | D) Recruitment | E) Data |
F) Power | G) Ethics | H) Analysis | I) Clarity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kiamanesh [42] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Peters [44] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Player [45] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Rasmussen [34] | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Rasmussen [33] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Rivlin [46] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
Note: According to the CASP protocol fulfilment of the item criteria is represented by 1 = yes, 2 = not clear, 3 = no. A) Was there a clear statement of the aims of the research? B) Is a qualitative methodology appropriate? C) Was the research design appropriate to address the aims of the research? D) Was the recruitment strategy appropriate to the aims of the research? E) Was data collected in a way that addressed the research issue? F) As the relationship between the researcher and participants been adequately considered? G) Have ethical issues been taken into consideration? H) Was data analysis sufficiently rigorous? I) Is there a clear statement of findings?