TABLE 2.
Quality Assessment of the 10 Studies Included in Systematic Review
| Reference | Selection Bias | Study Design | Confounders | Blinding | Data Collection Methods | Withdrawals and Dropouts | Overall Rating of the Article |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barry et al., 2008 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | Moderate |
| Strathdee et al., 2013 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | Moderate |
| Tross et al., 2008 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | Moderate |
| Knudsen et al., 2014 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Moderate |
| Hien et al., 2010 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | Moderate |
| Wechsberg et al., 2006 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | Moderate |
| Wechsberget al., 2013 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | Moderate |
| Woody et al., 2014 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | Moderate |
| Koblin et al., 2010 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | Moderate |
| El-Bassel et al., 2014 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | Strong |
Note. Based on Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies developed by the Effective Public Health Practice Project. 1: strong, 2: moderate, 3: weak.