Table 7.
Quality assessment for the papers included in the present systematic review according to an adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cross-sectional studies.
| Paper | Selection (out of 4 stars) | Comparability (out of 2 stars) | Outcome (out of 3 stars) | Total (out of 9 stars) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amanzio et al. (2016) | ★★★ | ★★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★★ (7) |
| Bastin et al. (2012) | ★★ | ★★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★ (6) |
| Garcia-Cordero et al., 2016 | ★★ | ★★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★ (6) |
| Hornberger et al. (2014) | ★★★ | ★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★ (6) |
| Ichikawa et al. (2013) | ★★★★ | ★★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★★★ (8) |
| Levy et al. (2018) | ★★★ | ★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★ (6) |
| Massimo et al., 2013 | ★★★ | ★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★ (6) |
| McMurtray et al. (2006) | ★★★ | ★ | ★ | ★★★★★ (5) |
| Mendez and Shapira (2005) | ★★★ | ★ | ★★★★ (4) | |
| Miller et al. (1997) | ★★★ | ★ | ★ | ★★★★★ (5) |
| Rosen et al. (2010) | ★★★ | ★★ | ★★★★★ (5) | |
| Ruby et al. (2007) | ★★★★ | ★★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★★★ (8) |
| Shany-Ur et al. (2014) | ★★★★ | ★★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★★★ (8) |
| Sollberger at al. (2014) | ★★★★ | ★★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★★★ (8) |
| Zamboni et al. (2010) | ★★★ | ★ | ★★ | ★★★★★★ (6) |
Thresholds for converting the Newcastle-Ottawa scales to Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) standards (good, fair, and poor) as applied elsewhere (Sharmin et al., 2017):
- 3 or 4 stars in selection domain plus 1 or 2 stars in comparability domain plus 2 or 3 stars in outcome/exposure domain = good quality.
- 2 stars in selection domain plus 1 or 2 stars in comparability domain plus 2 or 3 stars in outcome/exposure domain = fair quality.
- 0 or 1 star in selection domain plus 0 stars in comparability domain plus 0 or 1 stars in outcome/exposure domain = poor quality.