Table 2.

Risk of bias assessment (Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool) for prevalence studies.

First author/year	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
Amal Alkhotani/2020	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	NA	Y	N	Y
Giovanni Assenza/2020	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
Corrado Cabona/2020	Y	Y	Y	N	N	Y	NA	N	NA	Y
Elena Fonseca/2020	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y
Alfonso Giordano/2020	N	Y	N	N	N	Y	Y	N	N	Y
Xiaoting Hao/2020	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	N	NA	Y
Shanshan Huang/2020	N	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
Wendy R. Miller/2020	N	Y	Y	N	N	Y	Y	N	UC	Y
Kristijonas Puteikis/2020	N	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	UC	Y
Jillian L. Rosengard/2020	N	Y	N	N	Y	Y	Y	UC	UC	Y
Alvaro Larsen/2020	N	Y	N	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	UC	Y
Shanshan Huang/2020	N	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	N	Y	N	Y
Barbara Mostacci/2020	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y
Mehri Salari/2020	N	Y	N	Y	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
Stijn Van Hees/2020	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
Jacopo Lanzone/2020	N	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	N	Y	N	Y
The percentage of “yes” scores	43.75%	100%	75%	37.5%	68.75%	100%	75 %	68.75%	25%	100%

1: Was the sample representative of the target population?

2: Were study participants recruited in an appropriate way?

3: Was the sample size adequate?

4: Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail?

5: Was the data analysis conducted with sufficient coverage of the identified sample?

6: Were objective and standard criteria used for the measurement of the condition?

7: Was the condition measured reliably?

8: Was there appropriate statistical analysis?

9: Are all important confounding factors/sub-groups/differences identified and accounted for?

10: Were sub-populations identified using objective criteria?

Y: yes, N: NO, UC: unclear, NA: Not applicable.