Table 3.

Quality appraisal for clinical measurement research reports evaluation form.

Study	Item Evaluation Criteriaa												Total (%)	Quality Summary
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
Costa et al. (2008)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	100	Excellent
Moore-Reed et al. (2017)	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	96	Excellent
Schmidt et al. (2005)	2	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	96	Excellent
Wang et al. (2018)	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	96	Excellent
Beattie et al. (2011)	2	2	1	2	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	92	Excellent
Freitas et al. (2019)	2	2	2	2	1	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	92	Excellent
Garrison et al. (2012)	2	2	2	2	1	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	92	Excellent
Schmidt et al. (2015)	2	2	2	2	1	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	92	Excellent

Total score = (sum of subtotals ÷ 24 × 100). If for a specific paper an item is deemed NA (Not Applicable), then, Total score = (sum of subtotals ÷ (2 × number of Applicable items) × 100).

NA – Not Applicable. The subsections no. 6, asks for percentage of retention/follow up. This subsection only applies to reliability test-retest studies.

Quality Summary: Poor (0%–30%), Fair (31%–50%), Good (51%–70%), Very good (71%–90%), Excellent (>90%).

^aItem Evaluation Criteria: 1. Thorough literature review to define the research question; 2. Specific inclusion/exclusion criteria; 3. Specific hypotheses; 4. Appropriate scope of psychometric properties; 5. Sample size; 6. Follow-up; 7. The authors referenced specific procedures for administration, scoring, and interpretation of procedures; 8. Measurement techniques were standardized; 9. Data were presented for each hypothesis; 10. Appropriate statistics-point estimates; 11. Appropriate statistical error estimates; 12. Valid conclusions and clinical recommendations.