Table 3.
Quality of included studies assessed by the JBI critical appraisal checklist (cross sectional studies).
Criteria | References | ||
---|---|---|---|
Tsao et al. (13) | Akil et al. (27) | Cosansu and Yilmaz (31) | |
1. Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined? | Yes | Yes | Yes |
2. Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail? | Yes | Yes | Yes |
3. Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way? | Yes | Yes | Yes |
4. Were objective, standard criteria used for measurement of the condition? | Yes | Yes | Yes |
5. Were confounding factors identified? | Yes | Yes | Yes |
6. Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated? | Yes | Yes | Yes |
7. Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way? | Yes | Yes | Yes |
8. Was appropriate statistical analysis used? | Yes | Yes | Yes |