Quality Appraisal of All Included Studies

Author  Year	Components	Quality Criteria	Yes	No	Cannot  tell
Benton et al20	Quantitative non-  randomized	3.1. Are participants (organizations) recruited in a way that minimizes selection  bias?			x
		3.2. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard  instrument; and absence of contamination between groups when appropriate)  regarding the exposure/intervention and outcomes?	x
		3.3. In the groups being compared (exposed vs. non-exposed; with intervention  vs. without; cases vs. controls), are the participants comparable, or do  researchers take into account (control for) the difference between these  groups?	x
		3.4. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above), and, when applicable, an  acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptable follow-up rate for  cohort studies (depending on the duration of follow-up)?			x
Einterz et al12	Quantitative non-  randomized	3.1. Are participants (organizations) recruited in a way that minimizes selection  bias?			x
		3.2. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard  instrument; and absence of contamination between groups when appropriate)  regarding the exposure/intervention and outcomes?	x
		3.3. In the groups being compared (exposed vs. non-exposed; with intervention  vs. without; cases vs. controls), are the participants comparable, or do  researchers take into account (control for) the difference between these  groups?	x
		3.4. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above), and, when applicable, an  acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptable follow-up rate for  cohort studies (depending on the duration of follow-up)?	x
El-Jawahri  et al13	Quantitative  randomized  controlled (trials)	2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence  generation)?	x
		2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when  applicable)?	x
		2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?	x
		2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?	x
Green et al14	Quantitative  randomized  controlled (trials)	2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence  generation)?	x
		2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when  applicable)?		x
		2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?	x
		2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?	x
Hanson et al15	Quantitative  randomized  controlled (trials)	2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence  generation)?	x
		2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when  applicable)?		x
		2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?	x
		2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?	x
Hing Wong  et al19	Quantitative non-  randomized	3.1. Are participants (organizations) recruited in a way that minimizes selection  bias?		x
		3.2. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard  instrument; and absence of contamination between groups when appropriate)  regarding the exposure/intervention and outcomes?			x
		3.3. In the groups being compared (exposed vs. non-exposed; with intervention  vs. without; cases vs. controls), are the participants comparable, or do  researchers take into account (control for) the difference between these  groups?	x
		3.4. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above), and, when applicable, an  acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptable follow-up rate for  cohort studies (depending on the duration of follow-up)?			x
Machare Delgado  et al23	Quantitative non-  randomized	3.1. Are participants (organizations) recruited in a way that minimizes selection  bias?			x
		3.2. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard  instrument; and absence of contamination between groups when appropriate)  regarding the exposure/intervention and outcomes?			x
		3.3. In the groups being compared (exposed vs. non-exposed; with intervention  vs. without; cases vs. controls), are the participants comparable, or do  researchers take into account (control for) the difference between these  groups?	x
		3.4. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above), and, when applicable, an  acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptable follow-up rate for  cohort studies (depending on the duration of follow-up)?		x
Matlock  et al16	Qualitative	1.1. Are the sources of qualitative data (archives, documents, informants,  observations) relevant to address the research question (objective)?	x
		1.2. Is the process for analyzing qualitative data relevant to address the research  question (objective)?	x
		1.3. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the context, e.g.  the setting, in which the data were collected?		x
		1.4. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to researchers’  influence, e.g. through their interactions with participants?		x
	Quantitative randomized controlled (trials)	2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence  generation)?	x
		2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when  applicable)?		x
		2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?			x
		2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?	x
	Mixed methods	5.1. Is the mixed methods research design relevant to address the qualitative and  quantitative research questions (or objectives), or the qualitative and  quantitative aspects of the mixed methods question (or objective)?	x
		5.2. Is the integration of qualitative and quantitative data (or results) relevant to  address the research question (objective)?	x
		5.3. Is appropriate consideration given to the limitations associated with this  integration, e.g. the divergence of qualitative and quantitative data (or results)?		x
Nakagawa  et al21	Quantitative non-randomized	3.1. Are participants (organizations) recruited in a way that minimizes selection  bias?			x
		3.2. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard  instrument; and absence of contamination between groups when appropriate)  regarding the exposure/intervention and outcomes?	x
		3.3. In the groups being compared (exposed vs. non-exposed; with intervention  vs. without; cases vs. controls), are the participants comparable, or do  researchers take into account (control for) the difference between these groups?	x
		3.4. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above), and, when applicable, an  acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptable follow-up rate for  cohort studies (depending on the duration of follow-up)?	x
Radwany  et al22	Quantitative  randomized  controlled (trials)	2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence  generation)?		x
		2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when  applicable)?	x
		2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?			x
		2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?	x
Van Scony  et al17	Quantitative non-  randomized	3.1. Are participants (organizations) recruited in a way that minimizes selection  bias?			x
		3.2. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard  instrument; and absence of contamination between groups when appropriate)  regarding the exposure/intervention and outcomes?	x
		3.3. In the groups being compared (exposed vs. non-exposed; with intervention  vs. without; cases vs. controls), are the participants comparable, or do  researchers take into account (control for) the difference between these  groups?	x
		3.4. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above), and, when applicable, an  acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptable follow-up rate for  cohort studies (depending on the duration of follow-up)?			x
Vogel et al18	Quantitative  randomized  controlled (trials)	2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence  generation)?	x
		2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when  applicable)?	x
		2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?	x
		2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?			x