Table 4.

Available evidences for factors associated with SFHPs

Factor	Total studies included	Studies with score ≥ 50 %	Comments	Status of evidence
Gender	11	11	Association reported in 36.6% of studies with quality score ≥ 50%.	Insufficient
Marital status	5	5	Association only reported in one out of the five studies (20%)	Insufficient
Income	2	2	Association reported in both studies.	Insufficient
Age	9	9	Association reported in 44.4% of studies.	Insufficient
Work experience	12	10	Association reported in 40% of the studies and with quality score ≥ 50.	Insufficient
Educational level	15	14	Association reported in 50% of the studies with quality score ≥ 50.	Limited
Food safety Training	12	11	Association reported in 63.6% of the studies with quality score ≥ 50.	Moderate
Food safety knowledge	19	17	Association reported in 76.5% of the studies with a quality score ≥ 50. The score of studies with quality ≥ 50% ranged from 50 to 92%.	Strong
Food safety attitudes	16	14	Association reported in 71.4% of the studies with a quality score ≥ 50. The score of studies with quality ≥ 50% ranged from 50 to 92%.	Strong
Type of food premises	3	3	All the three studies (100%) found a positive association between type of premises (government or private) and safe food handling practices. Their score ranged from 67 to 92%.	Limited
Type of handwashing	1	1	Reported association between type of handwashing facility and SFHPs.	Insufficient
Presence of insects and rodents	1	1	Association reported in the study.	Insufficient
Location	1	1	No association between the location of a food premise and safe food handling practices	Insufficient
Adequate buildings & facilities	2	2	Association reported in both studies.	Insufficient