Table 9. Risk of bias of studies included in the age distribution of mortality study, using the Risk of bias tool ( Hoy et al., 2012).
| Study | 1. Was the study’s
target population a close representative of the national population in relation to relevant variables? |
2. Was the
sampling frame a true or close representation of the target population? |
3. Was some
form of random selection used to sample the selection, or, was a census undertaken? |
4. Was the
likelihood of non-response bias minimal? |
5. Were data
collected directly from the subjects? |
6. Was an
acceptable case definition used in the study? |
7. Was the study
instrument that measured the parameter of interest shown to have reliability and validity (if necessary)? |
8. Was the
same mode of data collection used for all subjects? |
9. Was the
length of the shortest prevalence period for the parameter of interest appropriate? |
10. Were the
numerator(s) and denominator(s) for the parameter of interest appropriate? |
11. Summary
item on the overall risk of study bias ^ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Achard & Chanono, 1997 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Bunter et al., 2014 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Debnath et al., 1990 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Debnath et al., 1995 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Fuerst-Waltl & Fuerst, 2010 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Ganaba et al., 2002 | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Moderate |
| Gulliksen et al., 2009 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Kudi et al., 1998 | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Moderate |
| Motus et al., 2018 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Prasad et al., 2004 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Pritchard et al., 2013 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Ring et al., 2018 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Svensson et al., 2006 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Upadhyay et al., 2017 | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
| Wymann et al., 2006 | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Moderate |
Yes = low risk; No = high risk. ^ Low risk: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate. Moderate risk: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate and may change the estimate. High risk: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate and is likely to change the estimate.