Table 3. Assessment of methodological quality of systematic according to Center for Evidence-Based Management.

^*1: Did the study address a clearly focused question?

^†2: Was a comprehensive literature search conducted using relevant research databases (e.g., ABI/INFORM, Business Source Premier, PsycINFO, Web of Science, etc.)

^‡3: Is the search systematic and reproducible (e.g., were searched information sources listed, were search terms provided)?

^§4: Has publication bias been prevented as far as possible (e.g., were attempts made at collecting unpublished data)?

^‖5: Are the inclusion and exclusion criteria clearly defined (e.g., population, outcomes of interest, study design)?

^¶6: Was the methodological quality of each study assessed using predetermined quality criteria?

^**7: Are the key features (population, sample size, study design, outcome measures, effect sizes, limitations) of the included studies described?

^††8: Has the meta-analysis been conducted correctly?

^‡‡9: Were the results similar from study to study?

^§§10: Is the effect size practical relevant?

^‖‖11: How precise is the estimate of the effect? Were confidence intervals given?

^¶¶12: Can the results be applied to your organization?

AMSTAR: Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews