Table 2.

Quality assessment of the reviews using AMSTAR

Study	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	Total
Benzies et al., 2013 [30]	0	0	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	0	6
Boundy et al., 2016 [21]	0	1	1	1	0	1	0	0	1	1	1	7
Brett et al., 2011 [25]	0	1	1	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	1	5
Evans et al., 2014 [26]	0	0	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	0	0	4
Goyal et al., 2013 [33]	0	0	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	0	0	4
Herd, et al., 2014 [32]	0	0	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	0	1	5
Lawn et al., 2010 [31]	0	0	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	0	1	5
McGregor and Casey, 2012 [35]	0	0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	2
Spittle et al., 2015 [34]	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	9
Vanderveen et al., 2009 [23]	0	0	1	0	0	1	0	0	1	0	0	3
Zhang et al., 2014 [24]	0	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	4

AMSTAR TOOL Key: 1 = Yes, 0 = No/Unclear/Not applicable. Areas assessed are numbered 1 to 11 on horizontal axis; 1-Priori design provided, 2-Duplicate selection/extraction, 3-Comprehensive literature search conducted, 4-Status of publication (i.e, grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion, 5-List of included & excluded studies provided, 6-Characteristics of included studies provided, 7-Quality of included studies assessed and documented, 8-Use of the scientific quality of the studies in formulating conclusions, 9-Use of appropriate methods to combine the findings of studies, 10-Assessment of publication bias, 11- Conflict of interest included