Table 2.
Quality appraisal of included studies.
| The Johanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool for Systematic Reviews (The Johanna Briggs Institute, 2017). | |||||||||||
| Author (date) | Clear review question | Inclusion criteria | Search strategy | Adequate sources searched | Criteria for appraising studies | Critical appraisal | Data extraction | Appropriate methods to combine studies | Publication bias assessed | Policy and practice | New research |
|
Etkind et al. (2020) |
✓ |
✓ |
✓ |
✓ |
Χ |
Χ |
✓ |
✓ |
Χ |
✓ |
✓ |
| The Johanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool for Qualitative Studies (Lockwood et al., 2015) | |||||||||||
|
Author (date) |
Philosophical perspective |
Research question and objective |
Data collection |
Data analysis |
Interpretation |
Locating the researcher |
Influence of/on researcher |
Participant voice |
Ethics |
Conclusions |
|
| Gillissen et al. (2020) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Constantini et al. (2020) | – | ✓ | ✓ | – | ✓ | – | – | – | – | ✓ | |
| Rubin et al. (2016) | Χ | – | ✓ | – | ✓ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Leong et al. (2016) | Χ | – | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| McCormack et al. (2019) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Englert et al. (2019) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Gershon et al. (2016) | Χ | Χ | ✓ | – | ✓ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Matzo et al. (2009) | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | – | Χ | Χ | Χ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | |
| Raven et al. (2018) | Χ | ✓ | – | – | ✓ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Schneider et al. (2018) | Χ | – | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Locsin et al. (2009) | ✓ | ✓ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | Χ | ✓ | |
| Locsin et al. (2002) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Hunt (2008) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | – | – | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Hewlett and Hewlett (2005) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | – | – | ✓ | – | ✓ | |
|
Andertun et al. (2017) |
✓ |
✓ |
✓ |
✓ |
✓ |
– |
– |
✓ |
– |
✓ |
|
| The AACODS checklist (authority, accuracy, coverage, objectivity, date, significance) (Tyndall, 2010). | |||||||||||
|
Author (date) |
Authority |
Accuracy |
Coverage |
Objectivity |
Date |
Significance |
|||||
| Langston et al. (2018) | ✓ | Χ | Χ | Χ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
|
Nouvet et al. (2018) |
✓ |
✓ |
✓ |
– |
✓ |
✓ |
|||||
| The good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research guidelines (Kelley et al., 2003). | |||||||||||
|
Author (date) |
Purpose and aim |
Background and context |
Methods |
Sampling |
Data analysis |
Results |
Interpretation |
Conclusions |
|||
| Jaakimaainen et al. (2014) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
Quality appraisal of included studies, using study design relevant tools.
✓ = meets the criteria (yes), Χ = does not meet the criteria (no), - = unclear.