Table 4.
Quality assessment of setting-based interventions.
| Study | Suitability of study design | Number of criteria met | Representativenessb | Randomisation | Comparabilityc | Credibility of data collection instruments | Attrition rate | Attributability to interventiond |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community-based | ||||||||
| Jenum et al. [39] | Category A | 1 | NO | NO | NO | YES | NO | NO |
| Jenum et al. [59]a | ||||||||
| Lupton et al. [45] | Category A | 3 | NA | NO | YES | YES | NO | YES |
| Kumpusalo et al. [42] | Category A | 3 | YES | NO | NO | YES | YES | NA |
| Kumpusalo et al. [65]a | ||||||||
| Isacsson et al. [37] | Category B | 3 | YES | E | — | YES | YES | — |
| Lingfors et al. [44] | Category B | 2 | NO | — | — | YES | YES | — |
| Weinehall et al. [56] | Category A/Category B | 2 | YES | NO | NA | YES | NO | NA |
| Brannstrom et al. [57]a | ||||||||
| Schuit et al. [52] | Category A | 4 | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | NA |
| Worksite-based | ||||||||
| Engbers et al. [34] | Category A | 4 | NO | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES |
| Kwak et al. [43] | Category A | 3 | NO | NO | YES | YES | YES | NA |
| Hedberg et al. [36] | Category A | 4 | YES | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES |
| School-based | ||||||||
| Ask et al. [24] | Category A | 3 | NO (pilot study) | YES (out of two units) | YES | YES | NA | NA |
| Ask et al. [25] | Category A | 4 | NO | YES (out of three units) | YES | YES | YES | NA |
| Bere et al. [26] | Category A | 3 | YES | YES | NA | YES | NO | NA |
| Grydeland et al. [35] | Category A | 4 | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | NA |
| Resaland et al. [51] | Category A | 2 | NO | NO | YES | YES | NO | NA |
| Bugge et al. [27] | Category A | 2 | NO | NO | YES | YES | NO | NA |
| Klakk et al. [40] | Category A | 3 | NO | NO | YES | YES | YES | NA |
| Puska et al. [50] | Category A | 2 | NO | NO | NA | YES | YES | NA |
| Magnusson et al. [46] | Category A | 3 | NO | YES | YES | YES | NO | NA |
| Elinder et al. [33] | Category A | 2 | NO | NO | NA | YES | YES | NA |
| Elinder et al. [66]a | ||||||||
| Marcus et al. [47] | Category A | 2 | NO | YES | NA | YES | NO | NA |
| Nyberg et al. [49] | Category A | 4 | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | NA |
| De Henauw et al. [31] | Category A | 2 | NA | NO | NA | YES | YES | NA |
| Hense et al. [67]a | ||||||||
| Ahrens et al. [68]a | ||||||||
| Sollerhed and Ejlertsson [54] | Category A | 3 | NO | NO | YES | YES | YES | NA |
| Stenevi-Lundgren et al. [55] | Category A | 3 | NO | NO | YES | YES | YES | NA |
| Busch et al. [28] | Category A | 2 | NO | NO | YES | YES | NO | NA |
| Busch et al. [29] | Category C | 2 | NO (pilot study) | NO | NA | YES | NA | YES |
| de Greeff et al. [30] | Category A | 3 | NO | YES | YES | YES | NA | NA |
| Kocken et al. [41] | Category A | 3 | NO | YES | YES | YES | NO | NA |
| de Meij et al. [32] | Category A | 3 | NO | NO | YES | YES | YES | NO |
| Jansen et al. [38] | Category A | 4 | NO | YES | YES | YES | YES | NA |
| Singh et al. [53] | Category A | 3 | NO | YES | NO | YES | YES | NA |
| Naul et al. [48] | Category A | 2 | NO | NO | NO | YES | YES | NA |
NA: not available. aAdditional references (e.g., design article) for further information on baseline data and design. bFor the studies on schools, representativeness referred to the schools as units and not to the children/students participating. cBaseline characteristics description or matching, if baseline BMI was not mentioned we considered Na. dBased on what is discussed or reported in the article, we did not consider NO in cases where I and C were in proximity, unless a possibility of contamination is discussed. eDoes not apply, no control group.