Table 2.
Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT) scores summary. Italics indicate studies that scored less than the average score of 68%. N/A: not applicable.
| Authors | CCAT category | Raw score n (%) |
|||||||
| Preliminaries | Introduction | Design | Sampling | Data collection |
Ethical matters |
Results | Discussion | ||
| Akroyd et al [14] | 2 | 1 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 0 |
| Lotrecchiano et al [18] | 1 | 1 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 0 |
| Westbrook [37] | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 15 (37.5) |
| Konstantinidis et al [31] | 4 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 16 (40) |
| Walsh et al [35] | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 19 (47.5) |
| Heartfield et al [29] | 2 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 20 (50) |
| Chuo et al [24] | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 21 (52.5) |
| Wang [36] | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 22 (55) |
| Gill [27] | 3 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 23 (57.5) |
| Ingelbeen et al [30] | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 25 (62.5) |
| Safwat and Pourabdollah [33] | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 26 (65) |
| Goldberg Goetz et al [28] | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 30 (75) |
| Byrne et al [22] | 3 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 32 (80) |
| Bekkers et al [21] | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 32 (80) |
| Popescu et al [32] | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 32 (80) |
| Sranacharoenpong et al [34] | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 32 (80) |
| Chang et al [23] | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 33 (82.5) |
| Moreira et al [19] | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 34 (85) |
| Fontaine et al [26] | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 35 (87.5) |
| Schneiderman et al [20] | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 35 (87.5) |
| Cortese-Peske [25] | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 38 (95) |