Table S1. Methodological QA of all included studies.

QA of included qualitative studies (n = 18 ) using MMAT five questions checklist
S/N	Studies	Is the qualitative approach appropriate to answer the research question?	Are the qualitative data collection methods adequate to address the research question?	Are the findings adequately derived from the data?	Is the interpretation of results sufficiently substantiated by data?	Is there coherence between qualitative data sources, collection, analysis and interpretation?
1.	Shiri et al [63]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
2.	Threader and McCormack [69]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
3.	Harding et al [34]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
4.	Moffatt and Noble [49]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
5.	Tang et al [67]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
6.	Walker and Berry [79]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
7.	Meacham et al [46]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
8.	Trusson and Pilnick [72]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
9.	Oystacher et al [58]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
10.	Dyer [18]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
11.	Gregg [28]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
12.	Nyblade et al [54]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
13.	Occhipinti et al [55]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
14.	González and Diaz-Castrillón [27]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
15.	Machado et al [42]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
16.	Luberto et al [41]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
17.	Gupta et al [29]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
18.	Solikhah et al [92]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
19.	Mohabbat-bahar et al [50]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Quality assessment of included mixed methods studies (n = 2) using MMAT five questions checklist
S/N	Studies	Is there an adequate rationale for using a mixed methods design to address the research question?	Are the different components of the study effectively integrated to answer the research question?	Are the outputs of the integration of qualitative and quantitative components adequately interpreted?	Are divergences and inconsistencies between quantitative and qualitative results adequately addressed?	Do the different components of the study adhere to the quality criteria of each tradition of the methods involved?
1.	Midding et al [47]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
2.	Carter-Harris [8]	No	Can’t tella	Can’t tella	Can’t tella	Can’t tella
Quality assessment of included quantitative descriptive studies (n = 28) using MMAT five questions checklist
S/N	Studies	Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the research question?	Is the sample representative of the target population?	Are the measurements appropriate?	Is the risk of nonresponse bias low?	Is the statistical analysis appropriate to answer the research question?
1.	Vrinten et al [77]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
2.	Azlan et al [3] (Phase 1)	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
3.	Zhang et al [91]	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Yes	Yes
4.	Yang et al [88]	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
5.	Wood [86]	No	No	Yes	No	Yes
6.	Wood et al [87]	No	No	Yes	No	Yes
7.	Tripathi et al [71]	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
8.	Tsai et al [74]	No	Can’t tell	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
9.	Tsai and Lu [73]	No	Can’t tell	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
10.	Wong et al [85]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
11.	Yeung et al [89]	No	No	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
12.	Maggio [43]	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
13.	Cataldo and Brodsky [11]	No	No	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
14.	Ostroff et al [57]	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
15.	Liu et al [40]	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
16.	Johnson et al [37]	No	No	Yes	No	Yes
17.	Rose et al [60]	Yes	No	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
18.	Williamson et al [84]	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes
19.	Steffen et al [65]	Can’t tell	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
20.	Esser et al [23]	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes
21.	Yilmaz et al [90]	No	No	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
22.	Gökler-Danışman et al [26]	Can’t tell	Can’t tell	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
23.	Ernst et al [22]	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
24.	Shiri et al [64]	No	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
25.	Ongtengco et al [56]	No	No	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
26.	Myrick [50]	No	No	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
27.	Bresnahan et al [6]	Yes	No	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
28.	Maguire et al [93]	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes
29.	Nakash et al [52]	Can’t tell	Can’t tell	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes
Quality assessment of included quantitative RCT descriptive studies (n = 3) using MMAT
S/N	Studies	Is randomisation appropriately performed?	Are the groups comparable at baseline?	Are there complete outcome data?	Are outcome assessors blinded to the intervention provided?	Did the participants adhere to the assigned intervention?
1.	Azlan et al [3] (Phase 2)	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
2.	Wearn and Shepherd [80]	Yes	Can’t tell	No	No	Can’t tell
3.	Shepherd and Gerend [62]	Yes	Can’t tell	No	Can’t tell	Yes
QA of included scoping reviews (n = 2) using five questions assessment (QA)
S/N	Studies	Where the objectives of the review clearly stated?	Are the review’s inclusion and exclusion criteria described and appropriate?	Is the literature search likely to have covered all relevant studies on the topic?	Did the authors assess the quality of included studies?	Are the results of the review clear?
1.	Webb et al [81]	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
2.	Stergiou-Kita et al [66]	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes

^aOnly the quantitative aspect of the study was reported