8. Assessment of methodological limitations using WEIRD tool for descriptive studies.

Study	WEIRD criteria
	1. Is there a clearly stated aim, objective or purpose for the source material?	2. Is there a clear description of the source of the information reported (transparency)?	3. Is there a clear description of the programme or intervention or policy or reform on which the source material focuses?	4. Is there a clear description of the context/s to which the information described in the source material relates?	5/6. Is the information accurate? (Non‐empirical/empirical studies)	7. Is the evidence representative?	8. Are any limitations of the information and/or methods discussed in the source material?	9. Is evidence provided to support any findings or conclusions made?	10. Are relevant rights and ethics considerations described?	11. Are any interests declared and any potential conflicts of interest noted?	Overall assessment
Blake 2020	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Unclear	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No or few limitations
Brown‐Johnson 2020	Yes	Unclear	Yes	No	Unclear	Unclear	No	No	Unclear	Yes	Major limitations
Carvalho 2019	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Unclear	Minor limitations
Chang 2006	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	Unclear	Unclear	Major limitations
Cheung 2015	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	Unclear	Yes ‐ partly	Unclear	Unclear	Major limitations
Ferranti 2016	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Minor limitations
Klomp 2020	No	No	Unclear	No	Unclear	Unclear	No	Unclear	Unclear	Yes	Major limitations
Schreiber 2019	Yes	Yes	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	No	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Minor limitations
Waterman 2018	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Unclear	No	Yes	Unclear	Yes	Minor limitations
WEIRD: Ways of Evaluating Important and Relevant Data tool (Lewin 2019)